| opendevreview | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/openstack-ansible master: Imported Translations from Zanata https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/981852 | 03:47 |
|---|---|---|
| noonedeadpunk | mornings | 07:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | so, I am slightly worried about this part of refactored role: https://github.com/adriacloud/ansible-collection-kubernetes/pull/29/changes#diff-c6995490a1fb3bcd6863e96d37408a61e8f71ff2318b5e40e2ebd8c0c9d0a249 | 07:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd really love to use systemd_service in there, but there's no way to make a dependency from collection to a standalone role | 07:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | but then we'd need to figure finally out how to publish things to galaxy, and make smth like openstack.systemd collection | 07:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | where put service, networkd, mount, etc... | 07:42 |
| noonedeadpunk | on other note - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981776 seems to be fixing regression in respecting constraints for metal jobs | 07:43 |
| noonedeadpunk | this one feels way better: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/978680 | 07:44 |
| jrosser | imho it is not the worst thing to have a standalone service setup there | 08:35 |
| jrosser | as you say until with have things on galaxy this is all a bit tricky | 08:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | jrosser: I was not sure about proxy part though... I was kinda thinking of leveraging systemd_service overrides to define the Environment' | 08:38 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-haproxy_server master: Remove support option httpchk https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-haproxy_server/+/981846 | 10:20 |
| gokhan | hi noonedeadpunk , how can we implement multi nova cell deployment with osa? may be we can benefit from multi az deployment https://docs.openstack.org/openstack-ansible/latest/user/l3pods/multi_az.html | 10:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | gokhan: hey! I was actually looking at it the other day | 10:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | and no, I don;t think it's possible with the current code | 10:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | Main issue was actually logic of configuration of the super-conductor, and then I am also not sure you can do parameters templating with multi-cells, which we use to simplify logic | 10:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/cells.html#template-urls-in-cell-mappings | 10:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | and we use that in mapping: https://opendev.org/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/src/branch/master/tasks/nova_db_setup.yml#L74-L83 | 10:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | so no, in case of cells there should be really a quite explicit support in os_nova role for that | 10:47 |
| gokhan | thanks noonedeadpunk for details, we need to work on os_nova role. Firstly I will try to go with creating cells manually. | 10:54 |
| noonedeadpunk | gokhan: I know that jamesdenton had a multi-cell deployment, but I don't know how they managed to do that :) | 10:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | gokhan: though what are you trying to solve with multi-cell? | 10:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | as given you're not having OVN - neutron is mainly the bottleneck anyway | 10:56 |
| gokhan | noonedeadpunk, jamesdenton gives information in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmHsRzNYFkM&t=133s | 10:59 |
| noonedeadpunk | I was there in the room :D | 11:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | But I can't recall any practical details about how | 11:01 |
| gokhan | The main reason using cell is to establish fault domains. We want to decouple the message bus and DB per segment to prevent a single point of failure from affecting the entire deployment. Cells are in different pods in dc. | 11:19 |
| gokhan | I was also there :) | 11:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | so what about neutron?:) | 11:25 |
| noonedeadpunk | and then superconductor anyway has to talk to each "regional" conductor | 11:26 |
| gokhan | noonedeadpunk, you're right about the Neutron bottleneck. In multicell deployment I will plan to use ovn with Chassis-per-cell (or per-pod) mapping. This can allow us to localize the network control plane traffic and align it with our physical fault domains | 11:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | but you can't really isolate traffic or tenant networks in segments today afaik | 11:31 |
| noonedeadpunk | you can build strucutre of sb/nb DBs to spread them across pods | 11:32 |
| noonedeadpunk | but still all networks gonna be "available" everywhere... Unless I am missing smth | 11:32 |
| noonedeadpunk | though OVN puts you in a way better place | 11:33 |
| noonedeadpunk | Eventually, we neither have ability to build tiering of nb/sb dbs, but this is another thing I really wanted to do, though -ENOTIME | 11:33 |
| gokhan | That makes sense. Regarding the network visibility/isolation issue you mentioned, do you think implementing Multi-AZ (Availability Zones) combined with Routed Provider Networks could act as a viable workaround for now? In theory, mapping specific AZs to our physical Pods and using routed segments should prevent a single tenant network from spanning across the entire deployment. Do you see any major pitfalls with this approach in a multi-cell | 11:36 |
| gokhan | context? | 11:36 |
| noonedeadpunk | afaik AZ do not isolate networks still inside of the AZ | 11:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | it's more of set of nodes where routers will be binded to | 11:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | but in no way prevent to bind ports from the network on whatever compute you tell it to bind | 11:37 |
| opendevreview | Damian DÄ…browski proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova master: Add hashi_vault pki backend support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_nova/+/949426 | 11:40 |
| gokhan | ou're absolutely right. Networking remains a significant challenge, and achieving true fault domain isolation there seems out of reach for now without more advanced new OVN features | 11:42 |
| gokhan | noonedeadpunk, given the networking limitations we discussed, it sounds like you'd find a Multi-region deployment more suitable for achieving true fault domain isolation? | 11:45 |
| noonedeadpunk[e] | Well... It is, but then you have really isolated networks 😅 | 11:46 |
| noonedeadpunk[e] | But az was never designed to be fault domain isolation | 11:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | so indeed, I guess only multi-region with shared keystone would provide true isolation and fault-tolerance | 11:51 |
| gokhan | yes, you're right | 12:02 |
| opendevreview | Damian DÄ…browski proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_aodh master: Add hashi_vault pki backend support https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_aodh/+/981599 | 12:10 |
| opendevreview | ourdia sadia proposed openstack/openstack-ansible master: doc: Overriding Python dependencies for services in OpenStack-Ansible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/981266 | 13:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | huh, interesting issue for Amphora in Debian 13 | 14:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | Failure: octavia.amphorae.driver_exceptions.exceptions.AmpConnectionRetry: Could not connect to amphora, exception caught: HTTPSConnectionPool(host='172.29.232.185', port=9443): Max retries exceeded with url: / (Caused by SSLError(SSLCertVerificationError(1, '[SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: Missing Authority Key Identifier | 14:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/adf036018f6f416296d0328158597b47/log/logs/host/octavia-worker.service.journal-09-53-21.log.txt#2913-2964 | 14:29 |
| damiandabrowski | a lot of POST_FAILURES today in CI :/ | 14:59 |
| damiandabrowski | https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?project=openstack%2Fopenstack-ansible&result=POST_FAILURE&skip=0 | 14:59 |
| noonedeadpunk | #startmeeting openstack_ansible_meeting | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Mar 24 15:02:01 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:02 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_ansible_meeting' | 15:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic rollcall | 15:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 15:02 |
| anfimovir | hello | 15:02 |
| chubinidzedr_ | Hi | 15:02 |
| -opendevstatus- NOTICE: Recent POST_FAILURE job results with no logs were due to upload errors in one of our providers, which has been temporarily disabled now so rechecking those should be safe | 15:03 | |
| damiandabrowski | hi! | 15:03 |
| noonedeadpunk | courtesy ping jrosser | 15:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic CI status | 15:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | Except POST_FAILURE which are apparently an infra outage, things not looking great when I look at PKI patches specifically | 15:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | Though I believe, that a root cause is likely in python_venv_build for many of them | 15:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981776 | 15:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | But then telemetry looks completely broken as well | 15:06 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_gnocchi master: Use Direct URL syntax for pip packages https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_gnocchi/+/979877 | 15:07 |
| noonedeadpunk | at very least gnocchi does require usage of direct url format instead of egg already | 15:07 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981148 | 15:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | And I think we should try to switch to this format sooner then later | 15:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | patches are quite trivial, thankfully | 15:08 |
| damiandabrowski | cool, thanks for pushing fixes! | 15:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd suggest to use the topic `osa/pep-508` to track things | 15:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | but some help there would be appreciated :) | 15:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic releasing | 15:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | so we're approaching to the coordinated release date, at which it would be amazing to have a beta release | 15:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | though realistically, I don't see how we can manage to do that | 15:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | anyway, I am planning to propose at very least switch to track 2026.1 branch for all projects | 15:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | and "fix" the tempest plugins and versions | 15:11 |
| noonedeadpunk | and try our best to get to somewhat stable state | 15:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | regarding release for stable branches - we have a bunch of backports to review | 15:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | it's been a while since our last release | 15:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | and also 2025.2 still does not have X.1 release... | 15:12 |
| noonedeadpunk | so I'd really try to do this first | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/parentproject:openstack/openstack-ansible+branch:%5Estable/.*+status:open+ | 15:13 |
| anfimovir | ++ need finish with 2025.1/2025.2 | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | anfimovir: do you know if all "important" backports are at least done? | 15:14 |
| noonedeadpunk | s/done/proposed/?\ | 15:14 |
| anfimovir | No, one moment.. | 15:14 |
| anfimovir | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_horizon/+/981720 / https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_cinder/+/980168 / https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount/+/979485 / https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/+/981635 | 15:15 |
| anfimovir | after this we can create new release for 2025.1 | 15:16 |
| anfimovir | For 2025.2 same... | 15:16 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, but we are not expecting anything to merge on master? | 15:16 |
| anfimovir | This one - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount/+/971356?usp=cherry-pick | 15:17 |
| anfimovir | Need back W after backport | 15:17 |
| anfimovir | rebase* | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | aha, ok, set it | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | sorry, I am missing the gerrit pings quite frequently | 15:18 |
| anfimovir | np :) | 15:18 |
| anfimovir | @damiandabrowski may be you can find time for it | 15:18 |
| damiandabrowski | sure, i'll have a look | 15:19 |
| anfimovir | thank you | 15:19 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible master: Remove deprecated HSTS Policies https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/981232 | 15:19 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible master: Remove openstack-ansible from exclude_project https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/980992 | 15:20 |
| NeilHanlon | ah crap... i got distracted 👀 | 15:20 |
| NeilHanlon | hello :) i'm here lol | 15:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | Also I have recalled about old patch regarding contributors docs refactoring: | 15:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/968932 | 15:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | NeilHanlon: heya! Nice to see you around! | 15:20 |
| NeilHanlon | :) hoiwzit | 15:22 |
| anfimovir | Ops, guys, sorry, forgot about... https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981100 | 15:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | eventually, there's an interesing "backport candidate" | 15:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_skyline/+/981149 | 15:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think we do a minor release without it ofc | 15:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | but eventually skyline yarn builds are broken without it for sure | 15:23 |
| noonedeadpunk | I am not sure if they fully work with it though either... | 15:24 |
| anfimovir | Yes, in octavia same fix available too ;)) | 15:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | At least it worked for me in multi-node AIO | 15:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | anfimovir: which one do you mean? | 15:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | (octavia seems to be utterly broken right now) | 15:25 |
| anfimovir | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/981135?usp=search | 15:25 |
| noonedeadpunk | So, I looked at the related bug you created, and it kinda feels like that except tons of errors in logs, it's "fine".... | 15:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think we can wait with this one as well for the next point release | 15:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | otherwise we never make it :D | 15:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic office hours | 15:27 |
| noonedeadpunk | I have one proposal to discuss | 15:27 |
| noonedeadpunk | Already multiple teams have added an excalated privilege group in Gerrit, which allows users within this group to do Code Review + 2, but not set +Workflow | 15:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | And I'd like to propose to add such group for OSA as well | 15:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | We can name it Power Reviewers or smth.... | 15:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | The idea behind it - so we could have another step between regular reviewers and core team | 15:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | and this way "recognize" contributions and direction of where they are going | 15:30 |
| jrosser | o/ hello | 15:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | to keep ppl motivated and engaged | 15:30 |
| noonedeadpunk | at the same time keeping the "safeguard" of merging not ready things by absent +W | 15:31 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible master: Migrate k8s cluster from osa ops into main tree https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible/+/975277 | 15:32 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_magnum master: Migrate capi driver installation from osa-ops https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_magnum/+/976261 | 15:34 |
| jrosser | agree with the extra reviewer tier | 15:34 |
| jrosser | sounds good and will help us move stuff forward | 15:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | NeilHanlon: damiandabrowski any opinions on that? | 15:35 |
| * noonedeadpunk want to engage all cores on the meeting to this topic :) | 15:35 | |
| damiandabrowski | fine for me | 15:35 |
| jrosser | it is still though the case that we have a lot of subtlety about why things are like they are, and this takes quite the understanding | 15:36 |
| jrosser | so the concept is good | 15:36 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah, we have plenty of history, and $reasons indeed | 15:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | how would we name it? I see ironic had `approvers` and kolla `reviewers` | 15:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | I don't like reviewers, as each reviewer is important | 15:37 |
| noonedeadpunk | and I do look and value +1, so don't want to downplay that part | 15:38 |
| jrosser | hardest computing problem - names :/ | 15:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | right :D | 15:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | well... I wonder if this problem is solvable with LLMs.... | 15:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | Maybe they're good at least for smth... | 15:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | it come up with either approvers or senior reviewers... meh | 15:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | maybe approvers not that bad and will align with ironic at least... | 15:42 |
| jrosser | it is descriptive too | 15:43 |
| jrosser | as anyone can review | 15:43 |
| noonedeadpunk | right | 15:43 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, agreed? | 15:44 |
| jrosser | `approvers` is ok with me | 15:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | #agreed create a new group named openstack-ansible-approvers with +2 code review privileges on top of regular reviewers role | 15:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | btw | 15:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | do we want to add also Backport Candidate label? | 15:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think it would be reasonable thing to do? | 15:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | *add privileges for backport candidate label to approvers? | 15:48 |
| damiandabrowski | yeah, makes sense | 15:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'm looking not in more details on Ironic ACL, and it seems that approvers there prety much == cores | 15:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | and they have also `ironic-reviewers` which is seemingly what we wanna name as approvers | 15:53 |
| noonedeadpunk | But I don't like naming it as reviewers... | 15:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | so yeah, sticking with the decision :) | 15:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | (and they do have backport candidate as well) | 15:55 |
| noonedeadpunk | given that I will be asking for permissions changes | 15:56 |
| noonedeadpunk | Should I also get ability to remove WIP state for Cores? | 15:56 |
| damiandabrowski | you as PTL wants to remove WIP state for patches uploaded by Cores? | 16:00 |
| damiandabrowski | I thought it's already possible :D don't have any problem with that | 16:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | no, it's not possible | 16:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | also it's not only about cores, but about any other user | 16:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | so if somebody uploads a patch in a WIP state and never removes the label - nobody except of this user (or gerrit admins) have ability to remove the WIP | 16:02 |
| noonedeadpunk | and I wanna grant cores ability to do that | 16:03 |
| anfimovir | Yes, for cores this need. | 16:03 |
| noonedeadpunk | ++ | 16:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | #endmeeting | 16:04 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Mar 24 16:04:28 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:04 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/openstack_ansible_meeting/2026/openstack_ansible_meeting.2026-03-24-15.02.html | 16:04 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/openstack_ansible_meeting/2026/openstack_ansible_meeting.2026-03-24-15.02.txt | 16:04 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/openstack_ansible_meeting/2026/openstack_ansible_meeting.2026-03-24-15.02.log.html | 16:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | I've pushed patches | 16:08 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/981924 | 16:08 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins stable/2025.1: Pin setuptools via global-requirement-pins.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins/+/976115 | 16:50 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount master: Do not try to reload mount on absent state https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount/+/971356 | 17:08 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount master: Remove unused Makefile https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-systemd_mount/+/978713 | 17:08 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron stable/2025.2: Ensure OVN logs to the journald https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/+/981634 | 17:08 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron stable/2025.1: Ensure OVN logs to the journald https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_neutron/+/981635 | 17:11 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build stable/2025.1: Cleanup environment on wheel build failure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981100 | 18:12 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build stable/2025.2: Cleanup environment on wheel build failure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981099 | 18:12 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-os_horizon stable/2025.1: Ensure translation handlers run after pull_catalog https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_horizon/+/981720 | 18:23 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/openstack-ansible-os_horizon stable/2025.2: Ensure translation handlers run after pull_catalog https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_horizon/+/981719 | 18:45 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins stable/2025.1: DNM: CI status https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins/+/981988 | 18:53 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins stable/2025.1: DNM: CI status https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-plugins/+/981988 | 18:54 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning stable/2025.1: CI check status https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981992 | 19:33 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Remove unused Makefile https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981993 | 19:35 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Remove unused Makefile https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981993 | 19:35 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Update outdate information in bindep.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981994 | 19:36 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Update outdate information in bindep.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981994 | 19:37 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning stable/2025.1: Pin setuptools via global-requirement-pins.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981992 | 19:50 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning stable/2025.1: Pin setuptools via global-requirement-pins.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981992 | 19:51 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning stable/2025.1: Pin setuptools via global-requirement-pins.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/981992 | 20:06 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build master: Stop removing first/last lines in constraints.txt https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ansible-role-python_venv_build/+/981776 | 20:16 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Symlink the role into tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/982006 | 20:24 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Symlink the role into tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/982006 | 20:24 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning master: Symlink the role into tests https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-apt_package_pinning/+/982006 | 20:26 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_manila master: CI: start use AIO for prevent problems with Ceph-Ansible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_manila/+/971878 | 20:27 |
| opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_manila master: Avoid leaking internal url for authentication error https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_manila/+/976027 | 20:28 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia master: Rename Octavia groups to remove dashes https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstack-ansible-os_octavia/+/978680 | 20:31 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.1.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!