| raghavendrat_ | hi | 14:01 |
|---|---|---|
| agalica | o/ | 14:02 |
| jbernard | #startmeeting cinder | 14:02 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Wed Jun 18 14:02:44 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jbernard. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:02 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:02 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'cinder' | 14:02 |
| jbernard | #topic roll call | 14:02 |
| jbernard | o/ hello | 14:02 |
| nileshthathagar | hi | 14:02 |
| agalica | o/ | 14:03 |
| raghavendrat_ | hello | 14:03 |
| * fungi is around for this one | 14:03 | |
| yuval | 0/ | 14:03 |
| whoami-rajat | hi | 14:03 |
| sfernand | hi | 14:05 |
| hvlcchao1 | hi | 14:05 |
| agamboa | o/ | 14:05 |
| kpdev | hi | 14:05 |
| Sai | o/ | 14:06 |
| jbernard | welcome everyone | 14:07 |
| jbernard | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-flamingo-meetings | 14:08 |
| jbernard | #topic followup | 14:08 |
| gireesh | hi | 14:09 |
| jbernard | 1) gate issues with image encryption patch | 14:09 |
| jbernard | mhen: ^ any insights there? i haven't looked at the most recent failure | 14:09 |
| jbernard | but it seemed like the failures we were seeing were unrelated | 14:10 |
| fungi | were they post_failure results? | 14:10 |
| fungi | ovh's swift was having a bad day yesterday | 14:10 |
| hemna | mep | 14:11 |
| jbernard | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/926298 | 14:11 |
| jbernard | fungi: yes | 14:12 |
| jbernard | in nfs-tempest-full test | 14:12 |
| fungi | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Status is the OpenDev status feed | 14:13 |
| jbernard | ok, maybe a recheck there will help, fungi do you know if ovh's issues are resolved today? | 14:13 |
| fungi | per the above, we took them out of the configuration around 22:39 utc | 14:14 |
| eharney | fyi cinder pep8 is failing everywhere until https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/952687 lands | 14:14 |
| fungi | we haven't tried to revert the removal yet, but won't until log uploads there are working correctly of course | 14:14 |
| hemna | eharney we found that one internally testing against antalope | 14:15 |
| eharney | hemna: heh, so did we | 14:15 |
| hemna | Eike is a new dev on our team. | 14:15 |
| jbernard | nice | 14:16 |
| jbernard | ok, once that one lands we can recheck mhen's patch | 14:16 |
| hemna | yah I'm stoked he found a few issues and put up a few upstream fixes | 14:16 |
| rmnijgh_ | Hi All, I'd like to request a review for this issue if thats possible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/863600 | 14:18 |
| jbernard | 2) barbican is still broken for stable/2025.1 | 14:18 |
| jbernard | /but/ octavia has been fixed and the patch has a +2, so hopefully that will resolve soon | 14:18 |
| jbernard | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/barbican/+/949096 | 14:18 |
| jbernard | 3) I updated launchpad with flamingo series and milestones, so blueprints can target the current dev branch | 14:19 |
| jbernard | that's all for followup from last week | 14:20 |
| jbernard | #topic topics | 14:20 |
| jbernard | :) | 14:21 |
| jbernard | very quickly, pep8 tests are failing | 14:21 |
| jbernard | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/952687 | 14:21 |
| jbernard | this is waiting a final gate run before being merged, that should happen reasonably soon | 14:22 |
| jbernard | next is fungi's item, bridging the gap | 14:22 |
| fungi | i'll try to be quick, but there's a lot we dug into... for some background on openstack-wide metrics analysis see ildikov's most recent ml post yesterday: | 14:23 |
| fungi | (er, monday actually) | 14:23 |
| fungi | #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/NTBNI7YIDCWBR6BTPEKVZIODWTVUIOXO/ BtG metrics analysis | 14:23 |
| fungi | also could be worthwhile to revisit her previous post in that thread going over the contributor and survey results (and anyone who hasn't filled those out for epoxy, please see if you can find a few minutes to do that!) | 14:23 |
| fungi | as a follow-up activity, we've started doing some team-specific analyses, focusing on teams that had multiple contributor and maintainer survey responses, i had a similar topic in nova's meeting yesterday | 14:23 |
| fungi | the contributor survey had 2 responses for cinder and both respondents had contributed for at least 2 years and were contributors to at least two other open source projects | 14:24 |
| fungi | most feedback was relatively neutral (averaging 2.5-4 out of 5) with the lowest scores being on "Changes you propose are reviewed in a timely manner" and "Automated test failures quickly direct you to problems in your changes" | 14:24 |
| fungi | the top challenge reported was trouble with review attention, while additional feedback mentioned unstable test jobs leading to a lot of rechecks and longer delays getting approvals or merging approved changes | 14:24 |
| fungi | the maintainer survey also had 2 responses with mostly higher scores than the cntributor survey (averaging 4-4.5), except for "Changes you propose are reviewed in a timely manner" which averaged 1.0 | 14:24 |
| fungi | contributing challenges reported were similar to those from the other survey (review attention), while the top challenges with reviewing were from contributors failing to address review comments or ci failures and insufficient familiarity with some parts of the code | 14:24 |
| fungi | looking at metrics we gathered from gerrit for the past 5 development cycles, we saw caracal was particularly slow for reviews (also observed for nova and their guess was slurp), but then things got somewhat better again in the past year | 14:24 |
| fungi | finding some way to improve the time to first review might help keep contributors, new and established, involved and engaged; we observed similar trends in some other projects and suspect it may be more pronounced where there's heavier reliance on third-party ci results? | 14:25 |
| fungi | unstable ci testing also featured in responses, so could indicate a need to re-prioritize fixes to tests or underlying test frameworks (devstack?) | 14:25 |
| fungi | it looks like cinder is mostly merging as many changes as are proposed, though there may be some slight increase in backlog in the past few years | 14:26 |
| fungi | we think that might be related to people proposing more changes late in the cycle | 14:27 |
| fungi | sorry, i know that's a pretty big info dump (i tried to pare it down as much as possible) | 14:27 |
| fungi | do note that we're pretty early in the process of analyzing these sorts of stats with a focus on improving the experience for maintainers and contributors, so for now this is probably a lot of stuff you already know, or at least confirming what you expected | 14:28 |
| jbernard | fungi: thank you for the summary, i haven't had a chance to yet process the ml mail, there's quite a bit to think about | 14:29 |
| fungi | we also aren't at the point where we have much in the way of guidance or recommendations yet | 14:29 |
| hemna | lots of info | 14:29 |
| fungi | anyway, i'm happy to answer questions or take feedback either here in the meeting or in the cinder channel later | 14:30 |
| jbernard | i agree, the results are close to what i would have predicted. even though it's not surprising, the date will allow us to have a more informed conversation going forward | 14:30 |
| fungi | we're of course planning to continue with this sort of surveying and metrics analysis over coming release cycles | 14:30 |
| fungi | and yeah, a big part of this is establishing a baseline so that we can better gauge whether future attempts at improving some aspects of this have any observable impact | 14:31 |
| whoami-rajat | the review bandwidth has been a concern for i-dont-know-how-many cycles, we've done several efforts to improve it but seems like there is still scope of improvement there | 14:32 |
| jbernard | ok, let's make this a followup for next meeting so folks have time to process | 14:32 |
| fungi | anyway, i didn't have anything else on this topic at the moment, if there are no immediate questions | 14:32 |
| fungi | in the nova discussion yesterday, we talked about how it might be helpful to have more transparent communication to contributors when the sorts of changes they're proposing are unlikely to get reviewed in the foreseeable future, and to avoid over-committing on specs whose changes are unlikely to get reviewed | 14:33 |
| fungi | basically there's no shame in saying that there's more work to do than there are people to do it, and while interest in getting some small change or feature implemented is laudable, what the project really needs is help shouldering the overall maintenance burden | 14:34 |
| jbernard | well said | 14:35 |
| whoami-rajat | one of the key things we've identified is that there are more contributors than reviewers hence we started asking contributors to review (also proposed review guidelines to ease the task) so they can receive reviews in return | 14:35 |
| whoami-rajat | some of the contributors we know do this actively which is really good | 14:36 |
| fungi | it's good if their reviews help reduce the workload on the final reviewers, or help those new contributors gain a deeper understanding of the project so they might in time be able to help maintain it | 14:36 |
| whoami-rajat | exactly | 14:38 |
| fungi | i guess there are no more questions for now, so i'm happy to stop monopolizing the meeting ;) | 14:40 |
| jbernard | fungi: thanks for presenting this! | 14:41 |
| fungi | any time, my pleasure | 14:41 |
| rmnijgh_ | I'd still like to ask if anyone could review this issue when he/her has time for it https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/863600 | 14:41 |
| jbernard | rmnijgh_: noted in the etherpad | 14:44 |
| jbernard | #topic open discussion | 14:44 |
| raghavendrat_ | we have couple of bug fixes in Dalmatian. Is backport to Caracal allowed ? | 14:44 |
| hemna | rmnijgh_ you might want to take a look at https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/836083 | 14:44 |
| hemna | I've had that patch out there for a while... | 14:46 |
| jbernard | raghavendrat_: that's 2024.1, i believe so yes | 14:47 |
| jbernard | raghavendrat_: it's the last non-eol stable release currently | 14:48 |
| raghavendrat_ | ok, thanks | 14:48 |
| fungi | yeah, scheduled to reach end of maintenance in ~3.5 months | 14:48 |
| rmnijgh_ | hemna: I think my earlier mentioned issue (863600) fixes the same problem. So that one might not be needed? (not sure) | 14:49 |
| hemna | well my fix doesn't require pulling all volumes from the db every 60 seconds either. | 14:52 |
| jbernard | ok, last call | 14:56 |
| jbernard | thank you everyone, have a good rest of your day | 14:58 |
| jbernard | #endmeeting | 14:58 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Wed Jun 18 14:58:11 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 14:58 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2025/cinder.2025-06-18-14.02.html | 14:58 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2025/cinder.2025-06-18-14.02.txt | 14:58 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/cinder/2025/cinder.2025-06-18-14.02.log.html | 14:58 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!