| *** ralonsoh_ is now known as ralonsoh | 07:47 | |
| *** haleyb- is now known as haleyb | 14:18 | |
| opendevreview | Michal Nasiadka proposed openstack/project-config master: propose-updates: Add ansible-lint https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/978566 | 17:44 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Michal Nasiadka proposed openstack/project-config master: propose-updates: Add ansible-lint target https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/978566 | 17:44 |
| rosmaita | fungi: i have 2 patches to fix the cinder stable/2025.2 gate, they're not really related, but i think i'm going to have to squash them together to get a +V from Zuul | 18:55 |
| rosmaita | i'm wondering if there's any alternative to a squash? | 18:55 |
| rosmaita | 978238: [stable-only] constrain setuptools | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/978238 | 18:55 |
| rosmaita | 978598: tests: Remove use of mutable fakes | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/978598 | 18:55 |
| fungi | rosmaita: you can disable the failing job(s) temporarily and then make them voting again after | 18:56 |
| rosmaita | fungi: when you put it like that, a squash sounds perfectly acceptable! | 18:56 |
| fungi | i fairly often squash trivial fixes if they're blocking each other | 18:57 |
| rosmaita | thanks! | 18:57 |
| rosmaita | just wanted to make sure there wasn't an alternative i hadn't considered | 18:57 |
| fungi | just write a good commit message and it's usually fine, but it depends on reviewer preference of course | 18:57 |
| opendevreview | Michal Nasiadka proposed openstack/project-config master: propose-updates: Add pcu target https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/978566 | 19:01 |
| opendevreview | Michal Nasiadka proposed openstack/project-config master: propose-updates: Add pcu target https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/978566 | 19:30 |
| rosmaita | fungi: got a gerrit question ... gerrit says this change can't be merged https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/978238 and that i should rebase and upload a new patch set | 19:56 |
| rosmaita | but when i rebase and try to upload, i get remote rejected no new changes | 19:56 |
| rosmaita | not sure what's going on | 19:56 |
| clarkb | rosmaita: does it merge cleanly to stable/2025.2? | 20:04 |
| clarkb | the parent commit does look like the tip of the branch https://opendev.org/openstack/cinder/commits/branch/stable/2025.2 | 20:05 |
| rosmaita | clarkb: yes, i haven't actually tried a merge, though, just cherry-picked the change onto it | 20:07 |
| fungi | we'll probably need to find the merger log entries from whichever merger failed to generate a merge commit | 20:07 |
| rosmaita | is there anything i can do that would be less work for you? | 20:08 |
| rosmaita | i'm assuming having 2 change ids in the commit message would not confuse gerrit? | 20:09 |
| fungi | probably not, though we're all in the middle of a 2-hour conference call (our pre-ptg working event) | 20:09 |
| rosmaita | oh, sorry, i can come back later | 20:09 |
| fungi | rosmaita: the second change-id is the only one in the trailers, so that's what gerrit will use | 20:10 |
| rosmaita | ok, that's what i thought | 20:10 |
| fungi | though usually we (in openstack) reuse the original change-id in backports to stable branches | 20:10 |
| fungi | oh, but this is a squashed one so the question is which to use, i guess | 20:11 |
| rosmaita | yeah, i used the one from the "stable-only" patch to keep things on that same review | 20:11 |
| rosmaita | would it make sense to abandon this review and submit a new one (with different change id)? | 20:14 |
| fungi | makes sense. anyway it's unclear why zuul would have voted verified -1 about being unable to merge | 20:15 |
| fungi | but the merger that tried and failed to merge it would have debug-logged the error | 20:15 |
| rosmaita | ok, i will try a new one | 20:15 |
| clarkb | rosmaita: is it possible you've got jobs relying on github? It looks like github is having errors | 21:30 |
| clarkb | I wonder if the problem wasn't the change itself but some dependency like a github repo that failed and bubbled up | 21:30 |
| rosmaita | clarkb: i don't think so | 21:31 |
| rosmaita | clarkb: you may be onto something ... i did a recheck and it looks like zuul picked up the patch and is setting up the jobs: https://zuul.openstack.org/status?change=978238 | 21:37 |
| clarkb | rosmaita: yes I think I found the merge request that failed 32e9baf77b9f4217a6f400abd4eb10eb for event 9bca931fca214313b49a919aa0093dd0 and I think it broke on setting up novnc from github | 21:43 |
| rosmaita | clarkb: thanks for looking ... i was pretty sure it was something i did wrong! | 21:44 |
| clarkb | `fatal: unable to access 'https://github.com/novnc/novnc/': The requested URL returned error: 500'` is the error I see. I am not 100% certain this is the cause. More like 95% due to the locality of the log messages | 21:45 |
| clarkb | but I think these merge requests are sequential so it seems very very likely | 21:45 |
| fungi | rosmaita: i wonder if novnc has stabilized enough to just be usable from normal distro packages again? | 21:47 |
| rosmaita | fungi: that is a good question, and i do not know the answer | 22:05 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.1.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!