| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer master: Use image timestamp for storage package naming https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer/+/975380 | 11:06 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer master: Use image timestamp for storage package naming https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer/+/975380 | 14:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | #startmeeting freezer | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Mon Feb 2 15:00:25 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is noonedeadpunk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'freezer' | 15:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic rollcall | 15:00 |
| noonedeadpunk | o/ | 15:00 |
| Luzi | o/ | 15:01 |
| mhen | o/ | 15:01 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic elections/project governance | 15:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | So election time is coming, and we need to decide if we want to continue governing the project as DPL model (distributed leadership) | 15:04 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd think it might make sense now still, to spread to load | 15:05 |
| mhen | excuse my ignorance, what does DPL imply? | 15:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/distributed-project-leadership.html | 15:05 |
| noonedeadpunk | in short - instead of Project Team Leader which is responsible for everything, and they decide on delegating some aspects to volunteers | 15:06 |
| mhen | I see, thanks for the summary | 15:06 |
| noonedeadpunk | DPL where ppl self-sign under some responsibilities, so it's less administrative load to a single person | 15:09 |
| Luzi | this sounds like the better way right now instead of a ptl | 15:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | eventually, if we wanna continue with DPL, khyr0n should vote negatively on the patch to governance | 15:09 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/974931 | 15:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | but we also can extend/add liasons if there are volunteers :) | 15:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | the deadline is Feb 4 | 15:10 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, going next | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic image timestamp missmatch | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | I took that as an action last week and has proposed a patch | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer/+/975380 | 15:13 |
| noonedeadpunk | it's quite trivial and should be good to go | 15:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic fixing Horizon plugin | 15:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | So there's a renaming patch which I worked on a while back | 15:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-web-ui/+/973949 | 15:15 |
| noonedeadpunk | the problem with it, is that I messed up somewhere, and pointed templates to non-existing location | 15:16 |
| noonedeadpunk | I will try to push the update later today | 15:16 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic elasticsearch deprecation | 15:16 |
| noonedeadpunk | last meeting we have agreed to deprecate elasticsearch storage engine as alternative to sqlalchemy | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | I have proposed initial patches for this cycle to execute on it | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-api/+/974842 | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-tempest-plugin/+/974844 | 15:17 |
| noonedeadpunk | given this is a SLURP release, we should be able to drop code early in 2026.2 | 15:18 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic restore-from-date has an unexpected behavior | 15:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | this is regarding the bug report | 15:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/freezer/+bug/2138883 | 15:19 |
| noonedeadpunk | so, thinking about this one, I'm having an opinion, that either option would be kida confusing | 15:20 |
| noonedeadpunk | so we need to change an approach to this option, and make it more "intended" | 15:20 |
| mhen | agreed, the restore-from-date would suggest an exact timestamp (e.g. from a list retrieved beforehand) and not suggest any fuzziness | 15:21 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think we should introduce to API some kind of "margin" when backup is selected, and fail the API request if the timeframe supplied by the user is "arguable" (or within the margin) | 15:22 |
| noonedeadpunk | well, or that... | 15:22 |
| mhen | we also need to be careful what interface we are talking about | 15:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | I was thinking, for instance, if there're like 2 backups, and user supplied somewhere in the middle, to have a conf option controllable by administrator, of percentage, within which reqiuuest will fail. So if difference in time is less then 20% - request will fail and have available options in response | 15:24 |
| noonedeadpunk | ah, right, that's an agent thing | 15:25 |
| mhen | freezer-agent does not really expose a list of backups, only api does | 15:25 |
| mhen | it discovers them on-the-fly when asked to do things | 15:25 |
| noonedeadpunk | so indeed, maybe we should do only exact timestamp for agent, and then attempt to do smth smarter for API? | 15:26 |
| mhen | sounds reasonable | 15:26 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah, ok , makes sense to me as well | 15:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | I think we might need to have a spec for this though, if we are to implement a new API call | 15:28 |
| mhen | regarding the margin approach: do you know any other backup products and how they handle this? | 15:28 |
| mhen | just curious | 15:28 |
| noonedeadpunk | I frankly was not thinking about that. I'd say for all backups products I worked with - there was a database of existing backups, you could see right away, and it was all in UI | 15:29 |
| noonedeadpunk | and then I can't recall dealing with API part at all | 15:30 |
| mhen | backups in freezer-agent don't have an ID iirc, do they have one in freezer-api? | 15:31 |
| noonedeadpunk | Yes, they do | 15:31 |
| noonedeadpunk | at least according to what I see in schema | 15:32 |
| mhen | I was just thinking about putting the ID from the 'GET /backups' list into a job for freezer-agent but I guess freezer-agent does not know about the IDs | 15:33 |
| noonedeadpunk | well, it kinda makes sense. I think it also depends if we want to make API part as a required component | 15:34 |
| mhen | then you could offer the "select backup from list" approach as usual | 15:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | it's *kinda* useful to be able to use freezer-agent in standalone mode | 15:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | when your cloud provider does not want to spawn API, you still are able to backup things... | 15:35 |
| noonedeadpunk | but it adds quite some unnecessary complexity for sure | 15:36 |
| mhen | as an agent within the guest VM? | 15:36 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah | 15:36 |
| mhen | imho sounds more like a stopgap measure in contrast to other OpenStack services offered as an integral part of the cloud | 15:38 |
| mhen | I like the central scheduler approach more ;) | 15:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | It would be ideal to have both somehow.... | 15:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | as then we might put pressure on providers to adopt API to help users :D | 15:39 |
| noonedeadpunk | struggling with local setups on VMs | 15:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | but yeah | 15:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | thus question - where in priority do we see this restore-from-date refactoring? | 15:40 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd say that we shouldn't chase it for 2026.1 | 15:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | Maybe we can update the doc to reflect actual behavior now | 15:41 |
| mhen | for the time being, fixing the parameter's description would at least fix the interpretation issue | 15:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | and scoper refactoring for 2026.2 | 15:41 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, agree then | 15:42 |
| mhen | we shouldn't rush it, the way to specify the restoration of backups is absolutely crucial | 15:42 |
| noonedeadpunk | I've recorded the decision in https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/freezer_meetings | 15:43 |
| mhen | sounds good | 15:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, great | 15:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | #topic open discussion | 15:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'm done with agenda for today - is there anything else to raise/discuss this time? | 15:44 |
| mhen | thanks for merging all my patchsets btw ;) | 15:44 |
| noonedeadpunk | thanks for proposing them :) | 15:45 |
| mhen | I'll see if I can return the favor and test/review some of yours this week | 15:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | I'd really love some level of review for my patches. | 15:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | yeah | 15:45 |
| noonedeadpunk | for now I was like - if some issue is still present - we can patch it quickly. At the same time attempting to grow CI coverage | 15:46 |
| noonedeadpunk | I was also thinking to reach back some users who attempted to test freezer lately and failed due to clients being outdated and some other things | 15:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | But probably I'd want to ensure that Horizon plugin is fixed first | 15:47 |
| noonedeadpunk | ok, cool thanks for taking time and joining the meeting | 15:48 |
| noonedeadpunk | see you folks around! | 15:48 |
| noonedeadpunk | #endmeeting | 15:48 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Mon Feb 2 15:48:35 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:48 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/freezer/2026/freezer.2026-02-02-15.00.html | 15:48 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/freezer/2026/freezer.2026-02-02-15.00.txt | 15:48 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/freezer/2026/freezer.2026-02-02-15.00.log.html | 15:48 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer-web-ui master: Move freezer panel under Projects dashboard https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-web-ui/+/973949 | 15:58 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer-web-ui master: Register a panel for API url https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-web-ui/+/973972 | 16:00 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/freezer-web-ui master: Remove information about removed option "--remove-older-then" https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-web-ui/+/961311 | 16:14 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer-web-ui master: Do not raise KeyError when sessions/jobs do not exist https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer-web-ui/+/975427 | 17:02 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer master: Fix restore-from-date behavior https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer/+/975437 | 17:54 |
| opendevreview | Dmitriy Rabotyagov proposed openstack/freezer master: Fix restore-from-date behavior https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/freezer/+/975437 | 21:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!