| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: Add timeline to remove enforce_scope in RBAC goal https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/915179 | 02:51 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: Move distributed-project-leadership model into doc https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/916822 | 02:55 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: Add DPL model & liaison reset policy https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/916833 | 03:24 |
| opendevreview | Ghanshyam proposed openstack/governance master: Add TC liaison in DPL model implementation https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/917516 | 03:43 |
| opendevreview | hongbin proposed openstack/governance master: Move openstack/kuryr and openstack/kuryr-libnetwork to Zun https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/917517 | 03:56 |
| *** zbitter is now known as zaneb | 08:09 | |
| opendevreview | James Page proposed openstack/governance master: Retire all single charm repositories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/903490 | 09:53 |
| opendevreview | James Page proposed openstack/governance master: Retire all single charm repositories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/903490 | 10:35 |
| *** ustrin_ is now known as ustrin | 11:20 | |
| opendevreview | James Page proposed openstack/governance master: Retire all single charm repositories https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/903490 | 13:36 |
| *** geguileo is now known as Guest2713 | 16:12 | |
| *** Guest2713 is now known as geguileo | 16:12 | |
| timburke | frickler, huh. i'm more confused than ever about how to "close" a feature branch. i was hoping that the stable->unmaintained patches might act as something of a guide, but then i realized that they're purely additive -- the actual deletion of the stable branch is done manually, i take it? so i could propose something to tag a bunch of "feature/<topic>/closed" tags or something, but it'd still require some manual | 17:06 |
| timburke | intervention to get everything resolved | 17:06 |
| timburke | i also notice, though, that we're got some feature branches that don't have entries under deliverables (feature/sp-review, feature/crypto, feature/crypto-review, feature/hummingbird, feature/repconn) and they *don't* appear on https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/config-errors?project=openstack%2Fswift&skip=0&limit=100 | 17:06 |
| timburke | would it work to just delete the branch entries from the various deliverables files and *skip* deleting the branches in git? | 17:07 |
| JayF | timburke: when Ironic has been in similar situations w/r/t our bugfix/ branches, we had to adjust project-config to allow branch deletion and do it manually with git client | 17:11 |
| JayF | timburke: (until we recently added support for this to releases automation) | 17:12 |
| timburke | i mean, i don't actually *care* about whether the branch gets deleted or not -- they're just stale and popping zuul config errors, which seems to be bugging somebody. if we could have them just get ignored, that'd be great. if we delete them, that's fine -- as long as we've got a tag for where they were at the point of deletion. if the tag is named the same as the old branch, that'd be ideal :-) | 17:16 |
| JayF | Yeah, for Ironic w/bugfix branches, we had to perform those kind of activities manually after getting permissions addressed in project-config. I'm unsure if there's another route to do it. | 17:19 |
| JayF | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/IronicBugfixBranchCleanup + https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/IronicBugfixBranchCleanupRFR are my notes from then | 17:21 |
| JayF | I am unsure it's useful, but there they are :D | 17:21 |
| timburke | thanks | 17:25 |
| JayF | we had to enable access to these branches in project-config, too | 17:26 |
| JayF | it's likely still in the master version of perms for ironic | 17:26 |
| frickler | we can't just ignore specific branches in zuul afaik. the entries in the deliverables files are not relevant for that, it is the existence of these branches in gerrit | 17:30 |
| frickler | the deletion of old stable/unmaintained branches is done semi automated by a tool that checks the xyz-eol/-eom tags. I'm not sure about the details of what ironic has done | 17:32 |
| frickler | but you might be able to adapt that once you update your gerrit ACL to allow you to do feature/* branch deletions | 17:34 |
| frickler | the issue with the zuul config errors in general is that there are so many of them, obfuscating the view to those of them that do actually matter | 17:34 |
| frickler | so the TC has tried to push projects to clean those up in order to make the work of maintaining the CI easier for the community as a whole | 17:35 |
| timburke | ah... and those old branches predate the existence of .zuul.yaml in swift... | 17:37 |
| JayF | Yeah, I suspect you'll have to go the Ironic route: setup the ACLs then manual removal | 17:40 |
| JayF | at a minimum, that path will work and get you outta this, versus some unknown path with release tooling :) | 17:40 |
| frickler | well if a branch has no zuul config, there also should be no error. the errors I see almost all come from actual references to centos-7 which is no longer available | 17:58 |
| timburke | let's see what CI does with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/917781 :-) | 18:16 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/governance master: Appoint Wenxiang Wu as PTL of Skyline https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/915108 | 22:57 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!