Friday, 2025-09-12

frickleryes, this is why projects should merge those changes asap07:08
elodillesyepp. we advertise it a couple of places that those generated patches should be reviewed and approved as soon as possible, especially if teams want to see release notes, but less active projects tend to ignore to do so08:36
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release ironic-python-agent 11.2.0 and branch for 2025.2  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95956908:42
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release nova RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96010308:42
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release ovn-bgp-agent RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96010608:42
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release zaqar RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96012508:43
elodillesas it is said in the commit message of those generated patch: "Add file to the reno documentation build to show release notes for08:43
elodillesstable/2025.2."08:43
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release zaqar-ui RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96012408:43
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release neutron RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96010208:58
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release manila-ui RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96008608:58
elodillesrelease-team: can one of you review and approve (if correct) the following 'new-release' patches please? (so that it won't be Self+2 from me o:)) https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:new-release+branch:master+is:open08:58
elodilles(^^^ this is what i mentioned yesterday: https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-release/%23openstack-release.2025-09-11.log.html#openstack-release.2025-09-11.log.html#t2025-09-11T16:21:36 )09:00
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release magnum-ui RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96008309:01
elodilles+1: i'm about to review the flamingo-rc1-deadline patches that lacks team response09:03
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release mistral RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96009209:08
fricklerelodilles: I would very much prefer to escalate the inactivity of the freshly refreshed requirements DPLs to the TC (hi gouthamr ;). I also haven't seen any action being taken in terms of reqs freeze for example09:10
ttxelodilles: I +2ed the missed constraints updates patches09:25
elodillesfrickler: i haven't followed the requirements team's activity, but we got some responses, which reminds me: pyroute2 thread: https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/SQLZ6ZOPUF5EHJ722ZQGPT7PSPV4PCNE/09:30
elodillesttx: ACK, thanks o/09:31
elodilles(i've answered to the pyroute2 thread)09:58
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release barbican RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96006210:05
opendevreviewYasufumi Ogawa proposed openstack/releases master: Release tacker RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96011310:10
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release trove-dashboard RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96011510:12
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release trove RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96011610:18
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release octavia RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96010512:17
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release ceilometer RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96006612:20
opendevreviewElod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: Release bifrost for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96004712:54
opendevreviewTakashi Kajinami proposed openstack/releases master: Create a new etcd3gw release  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96083214:00
ttx#startmeeting releaseteam14:00
opendevmeetMeeting started Fri Sep 12 14:00:32 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.14:00
opendevmeetUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:00
opendevmeetThe meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'14:00
ttxPing list: release-team elod14:00
ttxOur agenda for today is:14:00
ttx#link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/flamingo-relmgt-tracking#L36914:01
elodilleso/14:01
ttx#topic Review task completion14:01
ttx- Process any remaining library branching exception. (all)14:01
ttx#link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:flamingo-stable-branches+is:open14:02
ttxhttps://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/959165 is still open14:02
frickler\m/14:02
elodillesyes, i've pinged them on the other patch:14:03
elodilleshttps://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95769514:03
elodillesas this is the one that blocks the other one ^^^14:03
ttxAt this point we can drop it from release, or give it a bit more time14:04
ttxI'd be fine giving it a bit more time before pulling it out14:04
elodillesi think next week we have to do something :/14:04
ttxsince not much depends on it14:04
ttxyeah, by next week we'll have to pull it14:04
elodillesi think we might need to release it broken, as is14:05
ttxor release broken yes14:05
elodillesif it won't be fixed by then14:05
ttxok let's push back to next week for final call14:05
elodilles+114:06
ttx- generate release requests for all deliverables that do not have a suitable candidate yet: (elod)14:06
elodillessome were proposed already, i've copied them in the list; and i've generated release patches for the rest14:07
elodillesbifrost: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96004714:08
elodillesironic-inspector: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95956514:08
elodillesironic-prometheus-exporter: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96004814:08
elodillesironic-ui: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96004914:08
elodillesnetworking-generic-switch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95956714:08
elodillesswift: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95956714:08
ttxJust approved bifrost14:08
elodillesnote: there are some further ironic release patch14:08
elodillesi had a couple of -1's there for asking the teams to double check the version bumps14:09
elodillesbut no answer yet14:09
ttxhmm14:10
ttxmaybe you can +2/PTL+1 them with a note that they will be merged asap unless we get a -1... and I will approve them on Monday if no response14:11
ttxtogether wit those RC114:11
elodillesACK, I'll do that after the meeting then14:11
ttxI'll add a task for that14:12
ttxgood activity for my Monday train ride14:12
elodilles:]14:13
ttx- investigate https://bugs.launchpad.net/octavia/+bug/2121578 (elod)14:14
elodillesyeah, i had other things to investigate so had no time to deal with this :/14:14
ttxLet's push it forward to next week14:14
elodilleson the other hand i haven't heard complains about this issue14:14
elodillesso i don't know how serious this is14:15
ttx- heat-translator release patch - broken gate (elod)14:15
elodilles(let's hope it won't blow up in our face at release day :S fingers crossed :X)14:15
ttxI think we covered it14:15
elodillesyes14:15
ttx- Send weekly email. (ttx)14:16
ttxwill do in a minute14:16
ttx#topic Assign R-2 week tasks14:16
ttxAll set! Thanks elodilles 14:16
elodilles+114:17
ttx#topic Review weekly countdown email14:17
ttx#link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/relmgmt-weekly-emails14:17
* elodilles clicks14:18
opendevreviewMerged openstack/releases master: Release bifrost for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96004714:19
elodillesmail LGTM14:20
elodillesttx: sorry, i think i missed to mention some thing at one task 14:20
elodillesi mean two points:14:21
elodilles1) Branch devstack-plugin-* deliverables:14:21
elodilles#link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:devstack-plugin-flamingo14:21
ttxok will send in a few14:21
elodillesttx: ++14:22
ttxthis one needs attention from gmaan 14:22
elodillesso, Ghanshyam is on PTO 14:22
ttx(https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/960039)14:22
elodilleshe'll be back after 2025.2 Flamingo release :)14:22
elodillesso probably we should review and process this patch without his approve14:23
ttxlooks like we'll have to make a call then14:23
ttxwill do14:23
elodillesyes, frickler ttx , please do review and approve if it looks OK14:23
ttxdone14:24
ttxa bit of a no-brainer14:24
elodilles2) cycle-with-rc that are not trailing deliverables and that have not done a RC1 yet14:24
elodilles#link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:flamingo-rc1-deadline14:24
elodillesi've gone through the patches without response from team14:24
ttxyeah for those I will approve them on Monday unless they get -1ed14:25
elodillesand updated the hashes where it was needed14:25
elodillesttx: thanks o/14:25
elodillessounds good o/14:25
ttx#topic Open Discussion14:25
fungisummarizing the discussion with zigo yesterday: temporary disappearance of notes for the upcoming release between stable branch creation at and merging the auto-proposed change adding it to the index confuses some downstream consumers (e.g. distro package maintainers)14:25
elodillesprobably majority were approved and/or updated by teams :)14:25
fungiyesterday it first got raised to the opendev sysadmins as a potential content hosting problem or publication job failure, before we tracked it back to openstack's release process working as designed14:25
fungii can't help but wonder if there's a way to shorten or eliminate that gap, since even if maintainers are around and approve those changes quickly, there is still some period of time where the upcoming changes have vanished from the site entirely14:25
fungifood for thought (maybe a good ptg topic)14:26
ttx+114:26
ttxI'll add it14:26
fungithanks!14:26
fungiprobably needs some brainstorming of solutions14:27
elodilles+114:27
ttxelodilles: want to talk pyroute2?14:28
elodillesttx: ah, yes,14:28
elodillesfortunately it got solved meanwhile :)14:28
elodillesso14:28
ttxok so maybe no need :)14:28
elodillespyroute2 had a bug14:28
fungiwell, the immediate emergency got solved14:28
elodillesand needed some capping14:28
elodilles(elod) pyroute2 bug: https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-release/%23openstack-release.2025-09-08.log.html#openstack-release.2025-09-08.log.html#t2025-09-08T12:52:4614:29
elodilles    requirements capping to pyroute2==0.8.1 was accepted - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/960366 / https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/SQLZ6ZOPUF5EHJ722ZQGPT7PSPV4PCNE/14:29
elodilles(just to have it here, for ship's log o:))14:29
elodillesfungi: indeed, we might need to bump pyroute2 version on stable/2025.2 later on, if that is possible14:30
fungialso based on discussion, there's not yet a fix upstream in the library14:30
elodillesas far as i understood14:30
elodillesfungi: exactly14:30
elodillesno the current fixes proved to be not enough14:31
fungiincreasing constraints for non-openstack-controlled projects in a stable branch is generally something we don't do14:31
elodillesno, the current fixes proved to be not enough14:31
elodillesso yes, teams are waiting for further fixes14:31
elodillesfungi: exactly14:31
ttxok, anything else?14:31
fungiprobably we should stick with pyroute2 0.8.1 in our constraints list for the lifetime of the stable/2025.2 branches14:32
elodillesfungi: so i don't know whether there could be given some exception for pyroute2 later, or we have to stick to the capping14:32
elodillesfungi: i see. i did not remember the requirements team's policy on this14:32
fungii'm not aware of having previously made exceptions for cases like that14:32
elodillesfungi: i thought some exceptional cases we could bump versions14:32
fricklerusually exceptions are made for CVEs14:33
fricklerbut I'm not sure how strict we need to be on this14:33
fungiwe freeze constraints (except for stable point releases of our own software) in order to stabilize testing, and we don't make any security guarantees about versions of software in the frozen constraints list14:33
elodillesfungi: i think some rare cases when CI had issues we did that14:33
elodillesand what frickler says, when there were CVEs14:33
fungiif we have made exceptions for vulnerabilities solely in a dependency, that seems like a poor choice and sets incorrect expectations for users of those files14:34
elodillesbut i'm not fully aware of requirments processes, so i was just wondering14:34
fungiwe cannot, as a project, be expected to track vulnerabilities for all dependencies in our maintained stable branches, and changing versions of dependencies destabilizes testing14:35
elodilleshmmm. i see14:35
elodillesso probably those things needs to be handled downstream by vendors14:35
fungiand we've repeatedly discouraged downstream consumers from using the frozen stable constraints lists exactly because we don't track vulnerabilities in those dependencies14:35
fricklerexcept for kolla and osa there are many deployments not involving downstream vendors, so they plainly use u-c14:36
elodillesO.o14:36
fungiand it's their responsibility to alter the versions of dependencies or backport patches to them in those cases14:36
fungii really wish we had a better way to let them know, because i suspect in many cases they don't even realize that's the case14:37
fricklerwe (kolla) also in vain try to convince people not to use the images we produce in production14:38
frickler(which also are produced using upstream stable u-c)14:38
ttxanything more we can do at this stage?14:39
funginot that i know of14:39
elodillesthanks for the discussion! good to know this details.14:40
ttxalright, anything else to discuss?14:40
opendevreviewsean mooney proposed openstack/releases master: Release watcher RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96012314:40
elodillesttx: one more thing14:40
elodilles#link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:fix-release-requirements-update-constraints14:40
elodillessome upper constraints bumps were missed because people started to use python_version>=3.10 in upper-constraints.txt14:41
fricklerah, right, I need to review these, thx for the reminder14:41
elodillesso i've created the above fixes to not miss them in the future ^^^14:41
fricklerthough also with 3.9 gone, we could probably drop most of the >=3.10 stanzas14:42
ttxyeah we need project-config core to approve those14:42
elodilleswell, one fix is for cases when teams replaces setup.py with pyproject.toml14:42
frickleryes, that one is needed anyway indeed14:42
elodillesfrickler: i didn't even know we have py3.9 lines there14:43
elodillesfrickler: i was surprised, as flamingo only supports py310+14:43
fricklerthey were re-introduced when people still wanted to run centos9 jobs for some special cases14:43
elodillesbut centos9 is also not supported runtime, am i right? o:)14:44
ttxI need to run, so I'll close the meeting, but feel free to continue the open discussion in-channel14:44
fungilooking14:44
elodilleshttps://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/runtimes/2025.2.html14:44
elodillesttx: okay, thanks o/14:45
fricklerit is not, but some projects were slow in updating stuff, in particular since centos10 wasn't available for quite some time during this cycle14:45
ttx#endmeeting14:45
opendevmeetMeeting ended Fri Sep 12 14:45:35 2025 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)14:45
opendevmeetMinutes:        https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2025/releaseteam.2025-09-12-14.00.html14:45
opendevmeetMinutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2025/releaseteam.2025-09-12-14.00.txt14:45
opendevmeetLog:            https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2025/releaseteam.2025-09-12-14.00.log.html14:45
elodillesfrickler: i see14:45
elodillesanyway, my fixes handles now these cases, i've generated the missed new-release patches by using them14:46
elodillesmaybe we are too close to the release day to simply drop the py39 and >=py310 lines from upper-constraints.txt now14:47
elodillesand of course, again, i don't know what is requirements team's view on this14:48
frickleryes, likely best to wait until after the release14:48
fricklerhttps://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/948876 has some context14:48
fungiwait until after the release to approve the topic:fix-release-requirements-update-constraints changes?14:48
fricklerthe "requirements team" was pretty quiet on all that, mainly handled between me and rpittau 14:49
fricklerfungi: no, wait with removing final 3.9 figments from u-c14:49
fungiah14:49
elodillesyes, i think those fixes can be merged14:50
opendevreviewCyril Roelandt proposed openstack/releases master: Release glance RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96007615:54
fungii've proposed https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/960857 to add a security warning to the readme, global requirements and upper constraints files in the requirements repo15:58
fungimaybe that will help, i don't know15:59
opendevreviewYasufumi Ogawa proposed openstack/releases master: Release tacker RC1 for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96011316:21
fricklerat least something to point deployment projects and their consumers to, +119:49
opendevreviewGoutham Pacha Ravi proposed openstack/releases master: Release manila 21.0.0.0rc1 (flamingo)  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/96008721:59
opendevreviewYasufumi Ogawa proposed openstack/releases master: Release final heat-translator for 2025.2 Flamingo  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/95769522:36

Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!