| opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/oslo.utils master: is_valid_ipv4: Enable strict check by default https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.utils/+/903924 | 05:13 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | Abhishek Kekane proposed openstack/oslo-specs master: oslo.middleware: DisableIfMissing Healthcheck plugin https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo-specs/+/919963 | 08:10 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/oslo.messaging master: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/921506 | 09:46 |
| opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/castellan master: Replace use of testtools.testcase.TestSkipped https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/castellan/+/922594 | 09:51 |
| opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/tooz master: Replace use of testtools.testcase.TestSkipped https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tooz/+/922595 | 09:52 |
| opendevreview | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/futurist master: Replace use of testtools.testcase.TestSkipped https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/futurist/+/922596 | 09:54 |
| opendevreview | Daniel Bengtsson proposed openstack/oslo-specs master: Use cotyledon and futurist. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo-specs/+/922597 | 09:55 |
| tkajinam | stephenfin, I wonder if we should bump min testcase version (to 2.7.2) ? | 09:56 |
| tkajinam | testtools version, I mean | 09:56 |
| stephenfin | tkajinam: Is it any advantage? TestSkipped is still valid but it's just deprecated | 09:58 |
| tkajinam | stephenfin, ah ok. I'm afraid I misunderstood how the deprecated class is handled. | 09:58 |
| tkajinam | https://github.com/testing-cabal/testtools/commit/59b890db3c#diff-03718ece4f89fffe32451ca1d402dbd5149a3db26ec4821fa01c80262113889bL54 | 10:00 |
| tkajinam | it was anyway replaced here then the new code should work with the older version | 10:00 |
| opendevreview | Michal Arbet proposed openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2024.1: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922601 | 10:01 |
| kevko | Thank you for merge https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/921506 , I am going to make a backport for other stable releases ... I would like to only ask how can I backport it ... we in kolla we are backporting master -> stable/2024.1 , master -> 2023.2 ...etc .... but I know some projects wanted to backport master -> 2024.1, | 10:04 |
| kevko | 2024.1 -> 2023.2 ...etc ... so my question is ... first described option or the second one ? | 10:04 |
| tkajinam | kevko, I'm not aware of any strict described policy but I prefer the 2nd step-by-step approach | 10:06 |
| tkajinam | to make sure that we do not skip intermediate branches. | 10:06 |
| kevko | tkajinam: ok, do i need to wait for merge 2024.1 and then backport ..or can I just set those backports at once ? | 10:07 |
| kevko | master is now merged ^^ | 10:07 |
| opendevreview | Michal Arbet proposed openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2023.2: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922602 | 10:10 |
| opendevreview | Michal Arbet proposed openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2023.1: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922603 | 10:11 |
| tkajinam | kevko, either is fine. the change is tiny so proposing backports early may not be such confusing | 10:15 |
| kevko | tkajinam: Thank you | 10:23 |
| kevko | tkajinam: btw, what is the policy for unmaintained branches (as for example in this case we need it in zed ... ) ? | 10:40 |
| kevko | as it is in fact ugly bug | 10:40 |
| tkajinam | it's up to unmaintained cores | 10:56 |
| tkajinam | afaik no one from oslo belongs to unmaintained cores so I'm not too sure how it may be operated | 10:56 |
| opendevreview | Daniel Bengtsson proposed openstack/oslo-specs master: Use cotyledon and futurist. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo-specs/+/922597 | 11:11 |
| opendevreview | Daniel Bengtsson proposed openstack/oslo-specs master: Use cotyledon and futurist. https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo-specs/+/922597 | 13:13 |
| *** haleyb is now known as haleyb|out | 13:16 | |
| kevko | tkajinam: what does it mean "unmaintained cores" ? is there some list ? (i am still learning policies regarding unmaintained branches as it's quite new stuff) | 13:24 |
| tkajinam | kevko, unmaintained branches are maintained by different cores, unless projects opt-in. afaik oslo cores haven't joined the unmaitained cores so all unmaintained branches of oslo repos are maintained by a different team | 13:33 |
| tkajinam | kevko, tbh I don't know much about unmaintained cores. the main policy around unmaintained is that the project cores don't have to (or even shouldn't) care about unmaintained branches by default. | 13:33 |
| tkajinam | that's what I understood and was told multiple times | 13:34 |
| kevko | tkajinam: okay, now i understand ... | 13:34 |
| kevko | tkajinam: that's pity i would say | 13:34 |
| tkajinam | the main problem behind that transition is that many people insist they need old branches but they don't really help maintaining these | 13:35 |
| tkajinam | yes that's pity but we are still looking for the balance between requirement and available resources | 13:35 |
| kevko | tkajinam: no problem, i can fix our downstream images in my company ... i just always trying to share fixes with whole community ..and I think there is a big group of users who is running older versions as openstack release cycle is quite fast ... | 13:36 |
| tkajinam | yeah | 13:36 |
| kevko | tkajinam: and specifically this patch is quite important ... | 13:36 |
| kevko | tkajinam: another option is to use newer oslo ...but as non-oslo developer i can't say it can always work ... but i am sure that you understand us :) Thank you Takashi | 13:38 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2024.1: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922601 | 13:38 |
| opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2023.2: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922602 | 13:39 |
| opendevreview | Takashi Kajinami proposed openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2023.1: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922603 | 13:41 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/oslo.messaging stable/2023.2: Handle NotFound exception when declaring a queue https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/922602 | 17:02 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!