| TheJulia | stevebaker[m]: super temping we just set it as a job default, or at least make it a default eventually | 00:15 |
|---|---|---|
| stevebaker[m] | TheJulia: yeah, I figured starting with one job for a start is appropriate though | 01:07 |
| TheJulia | stevebaker[m]: definitely | 03:01 |
| rpittau | good morning ironic! o/ | 07:57 |
| rpittau | thanks kubajj :) | 07:57 |
| kubajj | good morning rpittau, and ironic! o/ | 07:58 |
| janders | good morning Ironic o/ | 08:16 |
| abongale | good morning ironic o/ | 08:42 |
| opendevreview | Jakub Jelinek proposed openstack/ironic master: Populate the conductor group field from config https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974694 | 10:30 |
| kubajj | ^ since this was a TODO, does it need a release note? | 10:30 |
| rpittau | kubajj: that's subtle, IMHO since the feature has been released already, we need a release note | 10:49 |
| kubajj | rpittau: will do then | 10:54 |
| opendevreview | Jakub Jelinek proposed openstack/ironic master: Populate the conductor group field from config https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974694 | 10:57 |
| clif | good morning o/ | 14:04 |
| opendevreview | Riccardo Pittau proposed openstack/ironic master: Migrate database charset from UTF8MB3 to UTF8MB4 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974430 | 14:12 |
| cardoe | morning ironic... if some folks have some time to go through https://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:ironic-week-prio+status:open that list should be in a good state to get feedback from folks | 14:40 |
| TheJulia | Good morning everyone | 14:49 |
| TheJulia | Hopefully everyone is brewinc foffee | 14:49 |
| fungi | it's already in my belly | 14:49 |
| TheJulia | err, brewing | 14:51 |
| TheJulia | so, then, more?! | 14:51 |
| * TheJulia updates the agenda and the vxlan networking etherpad | 14:52 | |
| mumesan[m] | I just had lunch so uh no tea till the evening | 14:52 |
| mumesan[m] | Also, hello ironic o/ | 14:54 |
| JayF | I'll have an item for open discussion. JFYI | 14:57 |
| * dtantsur is lurking from the mobile internet | 15:00 | |
| TheJulia | clif: i'm uncertian about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/972495, please see my comment, we can discuss after the meeting | 15:00 |
| TheJulia | #startmeeting ironic | 15:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Mon Jan 26 15:00:55 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is TheJulia. 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 'ironic' | 15:00 |
| janders | o/ | 15:00 |
| alegacy | o/ | 15:00 |
| kubajj | o/ | 15:01 |
| TheJulia | Greetings ladies, gentlemen, IRC bots! | 15:01 |
| clif | o/ | 15:01 |
| fungi | aloha | 15:01 |
| TheJulia | Welcome to this week's Ironic Meeting! Where we plot to take over the world^W^Wall baremetal provisioning! | 15:01 |
| TheJulia | This week's agenda can be found on the wiki! | 15:01 |
| dtantsur | o/ | 15:01 |
| TheJulia | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic#Agenda_for_January_26.2C_2025 | 15:02 |
| JayF | o/ | 15:02 |
| TheJulia | Everyone have coffee? | 15:02 |
| cid | 'o/ | 15:03 |
| TheJulia | cat wrangling too at the moment | 15:04 |
| TheJulia | #topic Announcements / Reminders | 15:04 |
| TheJulia | A standing reminder to review our ironic-week-prio dashboard, we presently have 26 items, lets get it down to 20! | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | #link https://tinyurl.com/ironic-weekly-prio-dash | 15:05 |
| dtantsur | Once I'm on unlimited internet, will catch up with reviews | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | We are also at week R-9 in the 2026.1 Gazpacho Release Schedule | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | Does anyone have anything else to announce or remind us of? | 15:05 |
| TheJulia | I guess not, and now that cat wrangling has been completed, we can proceed! | 15:07 |
| TheJulia | Time for working group updates! | 15:08 |
| TheJulia | #topic Working Group Updates | 15:08 |
| TheJulia | First up, standalone netwokring | 15:08 |
| TheJulia | networking | 15:08 |
| TheJulia | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-standalone-networking | 15:08 |
| TheJulia | alegacy: Any update for the group? | 15:08 |
| alegacy | still in a holding pattern waiting for reviews. This one is the next one up: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/966470 | 15:08 |
| alegacy | dtantsur: had left some comments... so I pushed up a new version | 15:09 |
| alegacy | hoping to close it off soon. | 15:09 |
| TheJulia | JayF: sounds like you feel a review jam would help move these items forth? | 15:09 |
| TheJulia | If that is the case, is there a day which would work well to have a 1 hour call to walk through the changes? | 15:10 |
| JayF | I'm mostly clear meetings today and tomorrow | 15:10 |
| TheJulia | I'm unfrotunately not clear tomorrow, I won't be around tomorrow | 15:11 |
| TheJulia | Would in a couple of hours work? | 15:11 |
| dtantsur | Me neither, nor today | 15:11 |
| TheJulia | hmm | 15:11 |
| TheJulia | well, I can make time today | 15:12 |
| alegacy | I'm open today after 1pm EST | 15:12 |
| JayF | Yeah, I mean I don't have so many meetings that I can't get something figured out quickly. If we need to. Today works. Tomorrow works. Later this week works but just a little more spotty | 15:12 |
| alegacy | same tomorrow, but could maybe move some things tomorrow morning. | 15:12 |
| TheJulia | I have 10-11:30 pacific open today before I start sprint planning | 15:13 |
| alegacy | sounds like dtantsur is unavailable both days though | 15:13 |
| TheJulia | yeah | 15:13 |
| JayF | I can do 10 Pacific | 15:13 |
| TheJulia | 2 is better than none | 15:14 |
| dtantsur | I'll take a look at my own pace, videos will eat too much traffic | 15:14 |
| JayF | I suspect Dimitry and I will be reviewing for different sort of stuff | 15:14 |
| TheJulia | dtantsur: fair enough | 15:14 |
| TheJulia | Yeah, we always do in a sense | 15:14 |
| TheJulia | Next up, async IO | 15:15 |
| TheJulia | dtantsur, anything for us | 15:15 |
| TheJulia | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-asyncio | 15:15 |
| opendevreview | Dmitry Tantsur proposed openstack/ironic-specs master: Asynchronous sensor data collection https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-specs/+/972754 | 15:15 |
| dtantsur | Here it goes ^^^ :) | 15:15 |
| TheJulia | Oh my | 15:15 |
| dtantsur | (yes, I timed uploading the spec with the section of the meeting) | 15:15 |
| TheJulia | heh | 15:15 |
| TheJulia | Okay, are we good to proceed then? | 15:16 |
| mumesan[m] | lol | 15:16 |
| dtantsur | That's all I have at least | 15:16 |
| dtantsur | Further work will need at least a rough agreement | 15:16 |
| opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/ironic-python-agent bugfix/11.4: Update .gitreview for bugfix/11.4 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-python-agent/+/974739 | 15:16 |
| TheJulia | Okay then! | 15:16 |
| TheJulia | Last but not least for the working groups is vlxan networking! | 15:16 |
| TheJulia | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/ironic-vxlan | 15:16 |
| TheJulia | So the tl;dr is we have a working mech driver in networking-baremetal to facilitate the localnet binding in OVN and the creation of segments for consumption. | 15:17 |
| TheJulia | The spec also has 2x+2 as of the last time I looked, so consider this the last call to review before the approval button gets pushed | 15:18 |
| TheJulia | There are a few other patches needed, and mechanics, but things are looking pretty good. | 15:19 |
| TheJulia | Any questions? | 15:19 |
| TheJulia | Since we have no discussion topics (unless someone just put one in after the meeitng started), we can proceed to Bug Deputy Updates | 15:20 |
| * TheJulia takes silence as a no | 15:21 | |
| TheJulia | #topic Bug Deputy Updates | 15:21 |
| fungi | ah, i guess i put mine in open discussion, not realizing i should have used the discussion topics section, sorry | 15:22 |
| * fungi will wait | 15:22 | |
| TheJulia | No worries | 15:22 |
| TheJulia | So, we had no new bugs last week, and one RFE filed regarding typing all of the code. This has come up before and some discussion might be needed. I'm not opposed to doing so, I think big giant patches at this point are just the wrong path to take | 15:23 |
| TheJulia | in other words, the responsible and lightweight thing is to just slowly move to the convention and begin to merge smaller changes as time goes on. | 15:23 |
| TheJulia | Thoughts? | 15:23 |
| JayF | This is what my open discussion items about | 15:23 |
| TheJulia | ack, okay then! | 15:24 |
| cid | Same, same. Totally missed to add something on the discussion topics. | 15:24 |
| JayF | We have an MLH fellow starting very soon, and we'd like to point them at doing type annotations. CID has written up a document on how to do it using the lessons learned from our failed attempt at IPA | 15:24 |
| TheJulia | If there is nothing else regarding bugs, lets determine who will be the next bug deputy! | 15:24 |
| JayF | With the primary difference being a focus on doing it a single module at a time instead of trying to do some sort of flag Day | 15:24 |
| JayF | And hopefully to get core buy into the process so that CID and I can use our core access to ensure that the patches don't get stale and need rebasing every 3 days | 15:24 |
| TheJulia | JayF: honestly, I'd be cool with "oh, I chanced this class or just this method. at this point | 15:24 |
| TheJulia | Yeah, thats where things go sideways | 15:25 |
| TheJulia | and always, really have | 15:25 |
| JayF | Yeah, the main reason I'm bringing it up for open discussion is more or less saying unless there is loud objection. CID and I will be pretty fast approving these patches to reduce disruption | 15:25 |
| TheJulia | Everyone who has pushed that in the past have attempted to do giant swaths at a time | 15:25 |
| JayF | Yeah, the approach here will be a module at a time and trying to coordinate so that the patches do not remain outstanding very long at all | 15:25 |
| cardoe | Well I've been typing classes as I touch them but I get -1's on that so I've stopped doing that. | 15:25 |
| TheJulia | Anyhow, lets proceed to Open Discussion then :) | 15:26 |
| JayF | Ncid and I will have an awareness of where code is moving around in other patches as to not foist the rebase onto other people | 15:26 |
| JayF | **and cid | 15:26 |
| opendevreview | OpenStack Release Bot proposed openstack/ironic bugfix/34.0: Update .gitreview for bugfix/34.0 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974741 | 15:26 |
| cardoe | If we could agree to that we could enable some checks with an extremely low threshold... how do ya eat an elephant? 1 bite at a time. | 15:26 |
| TheJulia | #topic Open Discussion | 15:26 |
| TheJulia | Proceed! | 15:26 |
| JayF | cardoe: Have a look at CID's proposed documentation change. That's the guide we're working on to point our mlh fellow at | 15:26 |
| cid | cardoe, feedback very much welcome. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974224 | 15:27 |
| fungi | i had "Bridging the Gap Flamingo Cycle Retrospective" for discussion, if this is a good time | 15:27 |
| cid | TheJulia, I will be bug deputy for next week. tks! | 15:27 |
| TheJulia | cid: thanks! | 15:27 |
| JayF | For my item, I will also email the list but I'm taking this as least a mild acceptance of a plan for us to rapidly land the type check PRs once we get a pattern established | 15:27 |
| TheJulia | fungi: isen't it a bit late as flamingo should have really been dsicussed back in october :\ | 15:28 |
| TheJulia | we're practically though the next cycle now :\ | 15:28 |
| TheJulia | so any room for improvement is kind of.. gone. | 15:28 |
| fungi | it takes time to gather survey responses after the release, and analyze them | 15:28 |
| TheJulia | Still, its a bit late | 15:28 |
| fungi | okay, no worries | 15:29 |
| TheJulia | But, what do you have for us? | 15:29 |
| fungi | oh, sure i can still cover it if you like | 15:29 |
| cid | Sure | 15:29 |
| fungi | ildiko posted openstack-wide 2025.2 (flamingo) cycle retrospective contributor/maintainer survey results and metrics to openstack-discuss last month: | 15:29 |
| fungi | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/XZZYFHMUCB3IZU5AXM366AY7WJXQMTBX/ Bridging the Gap Flamingo Cycle Retrospective Survey Results | 15:29 |
| fungi | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/FD4JALJN7OB2YNBUVWCPZZ6YNJMIL2JT/ Bridging the Gap Flamingo Cycle Retrospective Metrics Analysis | 15:29 |
| fungi | i and the other community managers on the openinfra foundation staff have also been digging into team-specific details and i'm doing a round of outreach similar to last cycle, to go over how things may have changed | 15:29 |
| fungi | ironic had more survey responses than most other teams (6 contributors and 1 maintainer), more would still be better of course, but this is great! | 15:29 |
| fungi | 4 of the contributors self-identified as established while the other 2 considered themselves new new to ironic, all contributing to 2 or more other open source projects | 15:29 |
| fungi | average ratings on the contributor survey questions were positive overall, with helpful contributor documentation coming in highest at 4.33 out of 5, yet discoverability of contributor docs received the lowest at 3.16 | 15:29 |
| fungi | contributors noted liking participating in the project overall, and felt that its proximity to the hardware layer presented unique challenges; only a third of respondents noted struggling to get changes reviewed or tests to pass | 15:30 |
| TheJulia | The reality is just that if we're going to consider/take/act on feedback, its best to do so when the iron is hot *and* we are able to drive that into current plans/actions | 15:30 |
| fungi | the new survey questions about priorities were insightful: a majority of contributors (4/6) said they follow development and prioritization through launchpad blueprints, surprisingly, since the maintainer did not mention blueprints at all | 15:30 |
| fungi | a third of the contributors also said that they're unsure how the ironic team is tracking development and review priorities, which could point to a need for better communication on that front | 15:30 |
| fungi | the rankings on the maintainer survey response were similarly high, with comprehensiveness of contributor docs receiving a perfect 5 out of 5 (though they admitted to having not referred to that documentation at all during the cycle) | 15:30 |
| fungi | the lowest ranking on the maintainer survey response was a 3 for ease of identifying test result failures, and the respondent also indicated trouble getting other maintainers to review their work | 15:30 |
| fungi | their biggest challenges in performing code review were change owners not addressing feedback in a timely manner or being unreachable for discussion, and incomplete changes (missing tests/documentation) or failing tests | 15:30 |
| fungi | responses noted that the time spent on mentorship was not as successful as it could have been, due to many mentees disappearing before reaching the point where they could become maintainers or engage in other leadership activities | 15:30 |
| fungi | survey engagement as i said was great as compared to other teams, particularly from contributors, so i'd love to know a bit more about how we can replicate that, but maybe also find a way to get more maintainers to weigh in next time too | 15:30 |
| fungi | as for metrics, the active maintainer count fell by 20% in flamingo as compared to epoxy (from 14 to 11), while the active reviewer count rose by 22%; note that both tiers of the split-core model count as maintainers for this purpose | 15:30 |
| fungi | interestingly, the speed at which changes were closed or merged got more consistent in flamingo: even though the median time rose from 7.25 to 8.27 days, the average (mean) fell by half from 127.27 to 63.22 | 15:30 |
| fungi | like in epoxy, the maintainers did close (slightly) more changes than were created in flamingo, indicating the team is still keeping up with this load; the totals fell slightly by around 9-10%, but still less than the drop in maintainers | 15:31 |
| * TheJulia wonders how people think we use blueprints | 15:31 | |
| fungi | the average (both mean and median) patchsets per review also rose by approximately 1, with the median doubling from 1 to 2, which suggests that it's taking contributors more tries to address feedback or get tests passing | 15:31 |
| fungi | the community managers have been distilling feedback from last year's discussions, and are working on compiling a concise set of techniques/recommendations for improving communication and efficiency, which i can get into more next week | 15:31 |
| fungi | we're also hoping to get some case studies done in concert with successful contributors and maintainers to highlight how specific practices and behaviors help them achieve better throughput, in hopes of being able to replicate them | 15:31 |
| fungi | anyway, that was a quick dump, i know it's a lot to take in but i didn't want to eat up too much of your meeting, so i'll put this on the agenda again for next week to give everyone time to digest and come up with questions or ideas | 15:31 |
| fungi | though i'm happy to answer any immediate feedback now if there's time | 15:31 |
| JayF | Given you've done these and seen these across multiple projects, do you have any specific concrete suggestions or observations that might be unique to ironic | 15:31 |
| dtantsur | wow, that's a lot of info, thanks fungi! | 15:32 |
| janders | fungi++ | 15:32 |
| TheJulia | So crazy question, would it not make sense to create a dashboard with rolling window statistics? | 15:33 |
| fungi | it would be great to have that, yes | 15:34 |
| fungi | at the moment, funding has been pulled for third party custom analytics development (what we were paying bitergia to work on) in favor of relying on the linux foundation's lfx insights developers | 15:34 |
| TheJulia | so is some sort of item for a rolling statistics from gerrit review on that team's backlog? | 15:35 |
| fungi | instead, the community managers have been writing scripts and manually performing long-running queries to put reports together | 15:35 |
| JayF | TheJulia: there is something like five or six issues already opened around other day-to-day uses of the metrics that aren't being taken care of. I don't know if you've had a chance to read the ML thread | 15:36 |
| fungi | but yes, lfx insights gerrit statistics should in theory eventually cover the points we've been looking at | 15:36 |
| fungi | we fed them details of the things we manually query to get them implemented | 15:36 |
| TheJulia | JayF: I spotted it, but I wanted to ask because there are different metrics and I didn't see if that was on the identified list, or not | 15:37 |
| fungi | so that's been a fairly high priority, among the list of things we've asker them for | 15:37 |
| fungi | er, asked | 15:37 |
| TheJulia | Cool cool, thanks | 15:37 |
| * TheJulia is still curious how people are saying we have blueprints | 15:37 | |
| JayF | TheJulia: they can't even currently sort repositories by governance, so there's no way to view all ironic related statistics at all right now | 15:37 |
| JayF | We do have blueprints... For changes to the ironic Nova driver | 15:37 |
| TheJulia | The tiered governance structure is a bit... different | 15:38 |
| fungi | TheJulia: my guess is assumptions based on other teams and/or momentum from ancient history. the same thing came up for the manila team, fwiw (contributor survey respondents said they looked at lp blueprints for prioritization cues, the maintainers didn't use them though) | 15:38 |
| JayF | I wonder if someone did for project in projects; same answer | 15:38 |
| TheJulia | Sure sounds like it, which calls into question the overall survey results | 15:39 |
| TheJulia | (unfortunately)( | 15:39 |
| fungi | but yeah, the entire reason we added these questions around prioritization for the flamingo cycle surveys was because epoxy responses gave the indication that there may be a mismatch between how teams are tracking priorities and where contributors think it's happening | 15:39 |
| fungi | so does point to an opportunity for a lot of teams to more effectively communicate how and where they prioritize development and review work | 15:40 |
| fungi | the answers we got from the flamingo surveys seemed to confirm that suspicion | 15:40 |
| JayF | "more effectively communicate" doesn't always really help though; I'm not sure what venues we have that we aren't using | 15:41 |
| fungi | that's where we hope to dig into recommendations for communication strategies | 15:41 |
| JayF | we can't make people read the copious notes we put out to ML, IRC, specs/docs repo, release notes, or even youtube videos -- I literally put out a video every PTG talking about our priorities and where to find them | 15:41 |
| JayF | we are a lot of places already; most people just don't turn to the "OpenStack" section of their local newspaper /s | 15:41 |
| TheJulia | And then if people are claiming to be contributors, how are they actually contributing then?! | 15:42 |
| fungi | like would it help to have cut-and-paste templates or autoresponse comments in reviews that also mentioned where to check the proposed change against the team's priority shortlist | 15:42 |
| JayF | fungi: our priorities don't really work that way though | 15:42 |
| TheJulia | Or is it just "I cloned it on github and I have my repo and somehow that is contributing" | 15:42 |
| JayF | fungi: we don't generally de-prioritize review for non-priority things | 15:42 |
| JayF | TheJulia: I am curious now if e.g. adamcarthur5 filled one out as an "Ironic contributor" but in external repos (he works on go SDK stuff among others) | 15:43 |
| fungi | a lot of the early feedback we got from organizations whose employees were struggling to contribute effectively indicated that they didn't realize their changes weren't a priority for the team they were proposing them in, or how to participate in the prioritization process/discussions | 15:43 |
| JayF | or generally if that pattern was followed by anyone | 15:43 |
| TheJulia | I think I'm the maintainer, unless others filled out the maintainer questionaire | 15:43 |
| JayF | Yeah, I have personally experienced that too, fungi, but in other projects. | 15:43 |
| dtantsur | TheJulia: I might as well.. | 15:44 |
| JayF | I would really, really like to think Ironic doesn't get that issue, but to be honest if we do it'd almost definitionally be a blind spot for me-personally given I'm the top project reviewer | 15:44 |
| JayF | TheJulia: dtantsur: I would've filled it out as a maintainer, but I don't trust that I remembered to | 15:44 |
| fungi | right, i can't say for sure it's a problem in ironic because the specific cases we looked into were for other teams, but for example changes just sat for weeks/months with no feedback at all when the change owner would have prefered a one-sentence response of "this isn't a priority for us right now" | 15:45 |
| TheJulia | I think there needs to be a question "how do you contribute?" | 15:45 |
| TheJulia | and we need to put the cases which are not actual contribution into that answer list to identify the disconnect | 15:46 |
| TheJulia | fungi: Yeah, we'd like that from other projects actually. | 15:46 |
| fungi | the survey outreach we do includes an e-mail to everyone who had a change merged to an official openstack project for the cycle, but yes we also want feedback from (perhaps even moreso) people who tried and didn't succeed to get their changes merged, so we can better understand why | 15:47 |
| TheJulia | speaking of, cardoe did you abandon that change we moved to networking-baremetal? | 15:47 |
| cardoe | No not yet. | 15:47 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: might as well, we have something better now :) | 15:48 |
| cardoe | Yeah agreed. | 15:48 |
| cardoe | Speaking of GitHub, I threw together a GitHub Action which if given a Gerrit account will take PRs and open them against the project. | 15:49 |
| cardoe | I do find it hard to find people's contributions in gerrit sometimes to dig them back out. | 15:49 |
| JayF | cardoe: that makes me weirdly nervous | 15:49 |
| fungi | the contributor experience survey does ask questions about "the changes you propose" and "feedback from reviewers" so there's an implication that we're looking for people attempting to contribute through proposing changes into gerrit, but you're right that we don't actually ask the respondents whether they do that | 15:49 |
| cardoe | I also get lost in old ones that should be ignored or old ones that haven't had feedback. So I've been asking folks about abandoning ones. | 15:49 |
| JayF | cardoe: anything where the security failure case is "soemone posts a thing that looks like you did it" makes me nervous | 15:49 |
| TheJulia | fungi: It sort of feels like there is room to gather more data through delineating questions, it would increase the analysis burden, but maybe if there is a way to really understand where respondants are coming from, then its more possible to understand the gap | 15:50 |
| TheJulia | and thus how to manage it | 15:50 |
| cardoe | JayF: It takes the GitHub PR and uses the same author as on the GitHub PR and uses the Gerrit user as the uploader. It updates things with a cross-link. I've held off on proposing it because I'd like it to educate the user with some docs. | 15:50 |
| fungi | sure, that's great feedback, i'll make a note of it and see how we might integrate that for the 2026.1/gazpacho retrospective round | 15:51 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: is the line author tracking maintained? | 15:51 |
| cardoe | It also only does so for PRs with a DCO. | 15:51 |
| cardoe | Yes cause git has a separate git author from git committer. | 15:51 |
| cardoe | The committer is the bot and the author is the original. | 15:51 |
| TheJulia | fungi: the other aspect, likely start the poll before the end of cycle and try to wrap it and analysis sooner into the new cycle. If somehow feedback can be available for PTG discussions, that helps close the loop and drive it into actual planning | 15:52 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: that... might... work | 15:52 |
| TheJulia | Wow, github shows 366 forks | 15:53 |
| fungi | TheJulia: yeah, we start just before the end of the cycle usually, during the rc period when most development activity has slowed, with a goal of having survey responses in around or just after the ptg (taking advantage of ptg sessions as opportunities to promote the survey more) | 15:53 |
| fungi | but we could start after feature freeze even? maybe? | 15:54 |
| TheJulia | That would likely be advisable and try to have something in advance of the PTGs so its top of mind while the teams are retrospecting | 15:54 |
| fungi | this time we delayed the analysis outreach because lots of teams skiipped their meetings through december and into early january | 15:54 |
| TheJulia | Granted, it won't be as detailed, but any data is better than no data | 15:54 |
| fungi | the analysis itself was complete in late november, just by then we were concerned there wouldn't be many people around to hear it | 15:55 |
| JayF | ++ to the idea of having this as part of PTG retrospective | 15:55 |
| JayF | even if it means we split cycles we're talking about instead of talking about it along release boundaries | 15:55 |
| fungi | all very good ideas, thanks, we'll definitely look at what options we might have | 15:56 |
| TheJulia | Going back to what JayF sort of said, there seems to be an opportunity, but we don't know what else we can really be doing. I mean, I don't think we're outright ignoring changes and having that pattern of behavior we even see in other projects. :\ | 15:56 |
| JayF | The real piece we'd need to make improvement on the one thing ID'd | 15:57 |
| JayF | is knowing *where* to communicate to these folks | 15:57 |
| TheJulia | And, I'm not even sure that is truly a thing we have identified | 15:57 |
| cardoe | How to communicate and how to identify patches the team is reviewing? | 15:57 |
| fungi | yeah, in this case it seems like the main items raised in analysis were contributor experience survey respondents not understanding how the ironic team prioritizes things, and the drop in number of active maintainers seemed a little odd | 15:57 |
| TheJulia | Granted, we could likely go back and scrub/check for stuff just sitting ignored | 15:58 |
| JayF | agreed; just making sure it's not left at 'communicate harder' which isn't really useful :D | 15:58 |
| cardoe | fungi: the prioritization thing a feedback against other projects? | 15:58 |
| TheJulia | JayF: actualy, that is anti-useful | 15:58 |
| * JayF notes he has a review dash he uses to see things not marked prio across any ironic repo which occassionally unearths things | 15:58 | |
| cardoe | JayF: all maintainers are issued bullhorns and make announcements using bullhorns. | 15:58 |
| fungi | cardoe: yes, it seemed we had indication it was a common issue due to secondary symptoms highlighted in epoxy responses so we added direct questions about it for flamingo | 15:58 |
| cardoe | JayF: yeah that's what I've been using as well. I'd honestly like us to abandon stuff that should be abandoned so that I stop coming back to it. | 15:59 |
| TheJulia | "communicate harder" when you don't know where the disconnect is, is practically gaslighting. We need to to constructive data. :( | 15:59 |
| JayF | cardoe: I've been alive 43 years and some change. Not a single time, ever, has anyone offered me any kind of voice amplification device ;) | 15:59 |
| JayF | cardoe: you are a core. Use the abandon button. Just give the person an action if they want to re-open it | 15:59 |
| fungi | right, i don't think asking anyone to "try harder" is going to help, that's definitely not the goal. it's to try and find what's working and see if we can replicate those patterns, or come up with additional time-saving solutions for maintainers | 16:00 |
| TheJulia | Please don't give JayF a loud speaker ;) | 16:00 |
| JayF | I *am* a loud speaker | 16:00 |
| TheJulia | exactly! | 16:00 |
| fungi | i can hear JayF on conference calls even when he's muted ;) | 16:00 |
| TheJulia | lol | 16:01 |
| dtantsur | hehehe | 16:01 |
| TheJulia | Anyway, was there anything else? | 16:01 |
| TheJulia | Like, who is going to run next week's meeting? | 16:01 |
| janders | I've got one small thing | 16:02 |
| janders | health monitoring Q | 16:02 |
| JayF | it's :00 so it needs to be extra small :) | 16:02 |
| JayF | TheJulia: I'll be around, I'll make a note | 16:02 |
| janders | 2/3 patches merged, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/967055 almost | 16:02 |
| janders | should I raise a doco change showing how to use health monitoring? | 16:02 |
| TheJulia | A final note, the week of 2/9 I will be in Ireland so unable to run a meeting that week. I'll likely be a zombie the following week since the earliest I'll get to a bed is sunday morning. | 16:02 |
| TheJulia | janders: always! | 16:02 |
| TheJulia | :) | 16:02 |
| janders | OK, will do | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | cool cool | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | Thank you for pushing that this cycle! | 16:03 |
| janders | thanks! further qs I can ask after the meeting | 16:03 |
| janders | thank you to all who helped review patches | 16:03 |
| JayF | janders: yes | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | Thanks everyone! Now, onward and back to regularly scheduled non-meeting chaos! | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | #endmeeting | 16:03 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Mon Jan 26 16:03:54 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:03 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/ironic/2026/ironic.2026-01-26-15.00.html | 16:03 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/ironic/2026/ironic.2026-01-26-15.00.txt | 16:03 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/ironic/2026/ironic.2026-01-26-15.00.log.html | 16:03 |
| JayF | Related: I'm going to be out Feb 13 through as long as two weeks recovering from a medical thing. | 16:03 |
| TheJulia | JayF: ack ack | 16:04 |
| dtantsur | oh, good luck! | 16:04 |
| janders | ++ | 16:04 |
| cardoe | I'll be out Feb 5th to 16th myself. | 16:04 |
| TheJulia | JayF: related to last weeks' redfish discussion, janders may have another update, but the tl;dr is there is some discussion of revising the ComputerSystem details which can be used to close the loop with vendors who do weird things. | 16:05 |
| janders | ++ | 16:05 |
| janders | need to follow up further | 16:05 |
| janders | it dropped off agenda last week | 16:05 |
| TheJulia | janders: I likely won't be able to join tomorrow, my wife has a medical appointment and I'm expecting the whole day to be a wash | 16:05 |
| janders | TheJulia no worries, I'll try sort this out | 16:06 |
| TheJulia | Thanks! | 16:06 |
| janders | np | 16:06 |
| janders | TheJulia kubajj would you like me to respin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/967055 removing the unnecessary test, or do we just merge it? It has 2x+2s, just needs workflow, was wondering if that's intended | 16:06 |
| cardoe | what are we doing about bifrost and centos9? If we're not fixing centos9 then we need to close the backports to 2025.1 and 2024.2 cause they won't pass | 16:07 |
| TheJulia | janders: I didn't go hunt down that test, but it makes me wonder overall | 16:07 |
| kubajj | janders: merge | 16:07 |
| TheJulia | I could be good with just merging it though for one test with mixed vlaue | 16:07 |
| TheJulia | value | 16:07 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: That is good overlap, becuase I think I actually start my trek to ireland on the 6th.... | 16:08 |
| janders | thanks! I will try sort out the doco change soon, will drop latest master code on my lab once the client change passes gate | 16:09 |
| TheJulia | cool cool | 16:10 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: if you can take some time to skim https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-baremetal/+/974619/ today, it would be good. I'm sort of hoping to try and get it sorted before going to ireland, and then try and focus on NGS stuff afterwards | 16:11 |
| cardoe | Will do | 16:11 |
| cardoe | So https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/860688 is an example patch.... should that be abandoned or not? How does it work with stevebaker[m]'s work? | 16:12 |
| TheJulia | Thanks | 16:12 |
| JayF | Yeah and while I'm out (it's carpal tunnel arthroscopy), I won't be completely unavailable, if something emergent happens I can left-hand my keyboard for a bit :D | 16:13 |
| TheJulia | I suspect, just seeing the title that it was the "we're never going to reach consensus on this" path | 16:13 |
| TheJulia | Hmm, cardoe, we could definitely spend some time abandoning ironicclient patches | 16:20 |
| JayF | maybe turn our 10am group networking review into group networking review then group review jam? | 16:21 |
| JayF | it'd be a good chance to land/abandon things | 16:21 |
| TheJulia | ++ | 16:25 |
| TheJulia | I've been checking out some of the items in python-ironicclient and abandoning them | 16:25 |
| TheJulia | mostly stuff form 2017 | 16:25 |
| cardoe | rpittau: since you got the release done i think https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/970562 can be unblocked | 16:28 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/python-ironicclient master: Add support for node health status field https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/967055 | 16:28 |
| rpittau | cardoe: done | 16:28 |
| rpittau | need a rebase though | 16:29 |
| cardoe | yeah cause the node health bumped the max_version variable. | 16:29 |
| cardoe | :/ | 16:29 |
| cardoe | JayF: you wanna rebase and I'll approve it again? | 16:29 |
| cardoe | https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/python-ironicclient+status:open that's pretty cleaned up. | 16:30 |
| opendevreview | Jay Faulkner proposed openstack/python-ironicclient master: Filter portgroups by shard https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/970562 | 16:31 |
| cardoe | Would anyone complain if I mass abandon patches labeled as [DNM] that are all 6+ months old? | 16:32 |
| JayF | one thing to keep in mind | 16:33 |
| JayF | I think if a core abandons a patch | 16:33 |
| JayF | I'm unsure if the non-core can unabandon it | 16:33 |
| TheJulia | only the author can | 16:33 |
| TheJulia | err | 16:33 |
| JayF | author or core has to unabandon, got it | 16:33 |
| TheJulia | committer | 16:33 |
| JayF | then it's not so bad | 16:33 |
| cardoe | I think it's author or core not committer. | 16:33 |
| TheJulia | Yeah, I mean, its doable, but sometimes the DNMs also contain the small quick fixes that got forgotten | 16:33 |
| cardoe | Cause that's what bit me on the nova spec changes. I was the committer and not the author cause I was updating someone else's spec. | 16:34 |
| cardoe | TheJulia: I'm happy to look at them. There's a lot that just change a line of white space that say "testing ci" | 16:34 |
| TheJulia | oh yeah, abandon CI tests with ruthlessness | 16:34 |
| cardoe | e.g. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/855109 | 16:34 |
| cardoe | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/895938 | 16:35 |
| cardoe | There's a lot of those that just touch setup.py | 16:35 |
| TheJulia | ++ | 16:35 |
| cardoe | As far as python-ironicclient goes I believe there's 2 patches we should land for 2026.1. We've already landed 100% API compatible-ness (that's what I was pushing on last week). | 16:36 |
| cardoe | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/970562 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/973948 | 16:36 |
| cardoe | The 2nd was good until the node health caused a conflict. | 16:37 |
| cardoe | I'd like to ping stephenfin and frickler again about https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/973287 so we can finish off the NGS changes. | 16:37 |
| cardoe | TheJulia: I'm likely to map my physical fabrics separation to conductor groups. So I'll utilize the conductor sharding for the behavior of network node groups and other operations. | 16:38 |
| cardoe | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/958505 was one of our Ironic 2026.1 priorities so landing that will complete that priority. | 16:39 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: I was wondering about that when I was going back and forth with claude | 16:39 |
| TheJulia | I do think its reasonable, but we do really need it landed in the sdk first | 16:39 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ironic bugfix/34.0: Update .gitreview for bugfix/34.0 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974741 | 16:39 |
| cardoe | My first goal is to land all this in a functional state. And then think about the sharding parts. | 16:39 |
| TheJulia | But I also wanted to see if you had thoughts or opinions there first | 16:39 |
| TheJulia | Regardless, in the current model it should just cover it, but conductor grouping allows for operational domain constraining to what you otherwise expect | 16:40 |
| JayF | cardoe: TheJulia: Wait, are you suggesting we're tying network scaling to conductor groups? | 16:44 |
| JayF | It is a bad assumption that conductor groups always map to physical environment differences (or vice versa) | 16:44 |
| TheJulia | They don’t, but on the ironic api query side | 16:46 |
| TheJulia | Say you have one ironic, two neutrons | 16:46 |
| JayF | so you could point each conductor group to different neutrons? | 16:47 |
| JayF | or vice versa, if that makes sense | 16:47 |
| TheJulia | well, we can't do that in ironic today, but if you have multiple fairly distinct neutron setups, you may need a filtered view to be presented | 16:52 |
| TheJulia | so you appropriate isolate flows or traffic | 16:52 |
| TheJulia | Imagine physnet-x and physnet-y maps to conductor_group zpm, where as physnet-a,b,c are map to EarthForce. You don't wnat jobs in the Earthforce environment trying to manage the ZPM environment, so each side you filter down the views | 16:53 |
| TheJulia | The chassis grouping in ovn should sort itself out based upon physnet mappings, fwiw | 16:54 |
| TheJulia | Sorry for fixing Stargate atlantis and B5 in my examples, Green/Purple didn't come to mind in time. | 16:55 |
| JayF | OK; so it's not a scaling problem just a deliniation one | 16:55 |
| TheJulia | Kind of, the physnet delineation is where the scaling is actually at | 16:56 |
| TheJulia | That is because the physnet mappings get held in the OVS metadata for each individual node taking part in OVN | 16:57 |
| TheJulia | Claude, what are you doing today | 17:42 |
| cardoe | TheJulia, JayF: What I'm saying is I dunno what the answer is. But once we get this working all together and landed that's the next area I'm gonna try and look at. | 17:51 |
| cardoe | fwiw... | 17:51 |
| cardoe | openstack baremetal node console show Dell-3R9PC14 -f json -c console_info | jq -r '.console_info.url' works | 17:51 |
| cardoe | It'd be nice if the CLI gave a nicer output of that URL | 17:52 |
| TheJulia | a quick "give me a human url if available" command seems like an easy win | 17:52 |
| cardoe | So :golf clap: stevebaker[m] on the feature. | 17:52 |
| cardoe | We did backport the kubernetes patch to our stable/2025.2 | 17:52 |
| cardoe | openstack baremetal node console url <node> ? | 17:53 |
| JayF | -f value -c console_info # I'm assuming this gives an ugly response | 17:54 |
| JayF | I'll drop a zoom link in here shortly so we don't have a 1 hour timer | 17:56 |
| JayF | just getting to the end of my current thread | 17:56 |
| TheJulia | I can drop a gmeet link which has no timeout as well | 17:57 |
| TheJulia | either works | 17:57 |
| TheJulia | the hour limit is only when I don't use my work machine | 17:58 |
| cardoe | The only confusing thing we hit was ironic-console-pod.yaml.template vs ironic-console.container.template... one is for systemd and one is for kubernetes | 17:59 |
| cardoe | You know which is which? | 17:59 |
| TheJulia | not off the top of my head | 18:00 |
| TheJulia | https://meet.google.com/ivk-hvkp-xwt ? | 18:00 |
| JayF | joining | 18:01 |
| JayF | beat me to it by seconds :D | 18:01 |
| cardoe | gimme just a little bit | 18:04 |
| cardoe | and I'll join | 18:04 |
| JayF | alegacy: https://docs.openstack.org/oslo.log/latest/user/guidelines.html | 18:56 |
| TheJulia | Last call for reviews on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/966470 | 19:26 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/ironic-specs master: VXLAN networking https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-specs/+/959401 | 19:38 |
| JayF | I have also passed down the question to my downstream w/r/t how much info is too much info to log re: ironic-networking | 19:40 |
| stevebaker[m] | Hey I wonder if I could get some reviews on this ironic-tempest-plugin patch which validates the nova graphical console change? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/963643 | 19:46 |
| cardoe | Sorry I missed. My wife dragged me out the door to renew drivers licenses. | 20:02 |
| cardoe | I’ll follow up on any I need to. | 20:02 |
| opendevreview | Julia Kreger proposed openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin master: Add project badge https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/972357 | 20:08 |
| TheJulia | stevebaker[m]: slight issue with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/963152 | 20:22 |
| TheJulia | The tl'dr is I would just increment the minimum version to beyond the field, but when the field is usable with the value | 20:56 |
| TheJulia | in case someone doesn't do something entirely unexpected like run that plugin against a Zed cloud. | 20:56 |
| opendevreview | Verification of a change to openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin master failed: Add graphical console validate to basic ops scenario https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/963643 | 21:01 |
| opendevreview | Steve Baker proposed openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin master: Add graphical console validate to basic ops scenario https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/963643 | 21:10 |
| cardoe | JayF: so what do you think about us making a directory of schemas? | 21:10 |
| cardoe | I don't hate it. | 21:10 |
| TheJulia | I think it makes a ton of sense to do | 21:11 |
| TheJulia | I wouldn't tack that on as a requirement for any chnage | 21:11 |
| cardoe | Well unfortunately the version he has is wrong | 21:12 |
| cardoe | It'll only work with packages installed editable. | 21:12 |
| cardoe | If you build a wheel, a deb, or a rpm it'll fail | 21:13 |
| TheJulia | huh, I'm not sure what is wrong then | 21:13 |
| cardoe | Lemme check something in the newer versions of pbr | 21:14 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Add ConfigLoader class to TBN and use it in TaskManager https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/972495 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Integrate TBN with vif_attach https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/973690 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Prevent multiple attach actions being generated for the same port https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974520 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Filter out NoMatch actions in _vif_attach_tbn https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974569 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Add an ordering method for TBN traits https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974519 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: WIP: Update TBN simulator for vif_attach planning https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/973691 | 21:17 |
| opendevreview | Clif Houck proposed openstack/ironic master: Update TBN config file to improve trait structure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974776 | 21:17 |
| cardoe | okay cause we are using newer pbr it should work-ish | 21:17 |
| cardoe | https://docs.python.org/3/library/importlib.resources.html is what you need to use. | 21:18 |
| cardoe | Relying on the installed package layout is wrong | 21:18 |
| stevebaker[m] | Hey can I propose that ironic-tempest-plugin changes run ironic-tempest-ipa-wholedisk-bios-agent_ipmitool-tinyipa in the check pipeline? This is the job which nova changes run so adding test coverage for new ironic nova features requires extra steps to validate that the feature and the tests actually work together | 21:19 |
| TheJulia | Sure, I guess, I'd honestly prefer to see the job name be changed since we haven't had an agent_ipmitool-tinyipa combo in a very very very long time | 21:21 |
| TheJulia | I *beieve* its a job alias | 21:21 |
| TheJulia | err, believe | 21:21 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: hh, that last sentence puts it together | 21:23 |
| cardoe | Cause data files don't always end up next to source code. | 21:23 |
| stevebaker[m] | TheJulia: Ah it looks like it is just ironic-tempest-bios-ipmi-direct | 21:23 |
| TheJulia | cardoe: yeah, now I understand what you were expressing concern over | 21:24 |
| cardoe | TheJulia: I do want your opinion on things like... https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/973557 | 21:37 |
| TheJulia | Broadly thinking, I guess it is okay. JayF you might have some deja vu if you look at ^^^ | 21:43 |
| JayF | I mean, I abandoned my attempt at doing that because native python enums suck | 21:44 |
| JayF | and that's more or less the feedback I got from some folks on that change | 21:45 |
| JayF | it's hard to argue with lol | 21:45 |
| JayF | I like the idea in theory, but the objects are just very weird to work with | 21:45 |
| JayF | cardoe: re: dir of schemas ... I honestly just wish the ironic-networking change would look like everything else and not cause a knock-on of a bunch of wheel-spinning work to make things consistent again | 21:46 |
| JayF | We consistently use constants until that unmerged change, where everyone decided it's OK that we didn't use constants except me. | 21:47 |
| cardoe | JayF: I agree with you. I was just trying to understand your opinion of that change outside of the other changes. | 21:47 |
| cardoe | The enum bits would get enforced by the type proposal that cid's got. | 21:48 |
| JayF | I mean, I think if we start relying on "I hope the json file gets installed alongside the python files" we're going to cause pain for people, even if we don't hear about it | 21:48 |
| JayF | cardoe: there are ways, outside of a python enum object, to ensure that types are enforced | 21:48 |
| JayF | cardoe: like simply using an object or dataclass would have a similar effect, with better ergonomics I believe | 21:49 |
| cardoe | Well there are ways to ensure the json gets installed is a thing... but that's now how the change is done | 21:50 |
| JayF | Yeah, more complexity for us to manage to avoid creating a python constant | 21:51 |
| JayF | just because something is possible doesn't mean we should be OK with adding on that complexity | 21:51 |
| JayF | I'm just frustrated because I suspect this was a claude decision that is getting defended for "I just want this to merge" reasons | 21:51 |
| JayF | and after the fact folks are thinking it's better | 21:51 |
| opendevreview | Steve Baker proposed openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin master: Add graphical console validate to basic ops scenario https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/963643 | 21:54 |
| opendevreview | Steve Baker proposed openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin master: Enable ironic-tempest-bios-ipmi-direct in check/gate https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-tempest-plugin/+/974780 | 21:54 |
| cardoe | Well what I'm saying is if ya like the json schema as separate files. I'll make a patch to refactor the code base and use importlib correctly to load them. | 21:56 |
| cardoe | It would certainly be easier to edit them as files cause right now I copy and paste them out to a file. Edit them and then paste them back in as a constant. | 21:57 |
| JayF | I like consistency, which we have until the ironic-networking change merges. I also prefer simplicity, which a python constant gives. | 21:58 |
| JayF | Honestly, I didn't have a strong preference until I realized we'd be dealing with importlib.resources crap to get the json files installed | 21:58 |
| JayF | wait, cardoe -- if what you're saying is right, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/966470 needs a -1 as it doesn't add the needed things to ensure the json schemas get installed | 22:01 |
| JayF | cardoe: ^ is that a correct understanding? | 22:01 |
| cardoe | Yes | 22:01 |
| JayF | ack, I see your vote on it and have flipped mine too | 22:02 |
| cardoe | They're not called out in pyproject.toml so they won't be installed | 22:02 |
| cardoe | So it'll fail. | 22:02 |
| JayF | Well, it doesn't fail | 22:03 |
| JayF | CI is happy | 22:03 |
| cardoe | because we install with pip install -e in CI | 22:03 |
| JayF | even more reason to dodge importlib.metadata installed crap | 22:03 |
| cardoe | I'd rather we use it explicitly | 22:03 |
| cardoe | Right now pbr does some magic under the hood. | 22:04 |
| JayF | After having joined the gentoo python project; I rarely trust python pacakging tooling to work sanely in all circumstances | 22:04 |
| JayF | which leads me in a direction to use as little of the API surface of python packaging as I can get away with | 22:04 |
| cardoe | I'd just rather be explicit when its used. | 22:07 |
| opendevreview | Steve Baker proposed openstack/ironic master: Remove old -ipmitool job definitions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/974789 | 22:28 |
| opendevreview | Julia Kreger proposed openstack/networking-baremetal master: WIP: Trunk port reconciliation for L2VNI attachments https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-baremetal/+/974619 | 22:40 |
| cardoe | JayF: so if I can poke my toe on your lawn again... what's your complaint about the enum exactly? Cause it seemed like it made the case I proposed safer and consistently transformed the data. | 23:03 |
| cardoe | I'd also encourage ya to take a peek at hatch. It's honestly everything pbr wants to be but jettisons the depend on wrapping setuptools. It does everything declaratively without any magic. Since venv's are what the world uses they're first class citizens. So you get tox style support baked in and don't need to re-declare depends. | 23:16 |
| opendevreview | Julia Kreger proposed openstack/networking-baremetal master: WIP: Trunk port reconciliation for L2VNI attachments https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-baremetal/+/974619 | 23:36 |
| JayF | cardoe: just me-personally has a distaste for enum-the-python-builtin, I believe someone here also expressed that to me when I wrote a similarly shaped change for another part of the codebase (maybe dmitry? but I don't remember so don't wanna throw him under a make-believe bus) | 23:48 |
| JayF | cardoe: note that you only got that feedback when you asked it from me :) | 23:49 |
| JayF | cardoe: I like a lot of external python-setuptools-replacement-y things, but we are in openstack, we use pbr and I don't wanna be inconsistent | 23:49 |
| cardoe | I'm not talking about OpenStack stuff. You mentioned when working on Python packages and Gentoo. So I was just throwing a recommendation out there. I compared it to pbr/tox since I figured that'd seem familiar. | 23:50 |
| JayF | oh, with the gentoo python project hat on, the proliferation of tools is part of the problem :) every new tool is a new thing we have to be able to account for and build with | 23:56 |
| JayF | I spent an hour-ish this afternoon on this: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/45538 | 23:56 |
| JayF | claude-code is so effecient at coding itself they don't have to worry about things like consistent, easy installation methods because they can yolo yolo yolo it all | 23:57 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!