| gmann | spotz_: this one seems up to date https://www.stackalytics.io/ | 00:52 |
|---|---|---|
| gmann | "Last updated on 15 Mar 2022 11:59:41 UTC" | 00:52 |
| gmann | https://www.stackalytics.com/ is no more maintained. | 00:53 |
| spotz_ | gmann thanks! | 00:54 |
| gmann | dansmith: I am little late for review on unified limit guide (i thought of doing it in my evening(now) but it is merged before that), I left few comments in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/833672 | 02:53 |
| *** pojadhav- is now known as pojadhav | 08:54 | |
| *** diablo_rojo is now known as Guest2315 | 13:02 | |
| dansmith | gmann: oh yeah sorry, that was pretty quick! I'll start on an amendment | 13:27 |
| gmann | dansmith: thanks | 14:21 |
| dansmith | gmann: on the last thing... I thought I already suggested the glance api as a template.. are you saying be more specific in "unless you have an existing one, do it this way" ? | 14:22 |
| gmann | dansmith: yeah, I am thinking it will help to avoid multiple different type of APIs for get quota (for project with no old APIs) among projects. glance example is good but mentioning about 'if you want to implement new API these are things you need/should take care to have a unified APIs among OpenStack' | 14:25 |
| dansmith | okay, glance's case is super simple so I'm not sure everyone can or will want to be quite that spartan, but I also can't really think of a counterexample | 14:26 |
| dansmith | maybe I'll just say "use this as a base at least" ? | 14:26 |
| gmann | +1 | 14:26 |
| gmann | agree, APIs would not be consistent among projects at least when projects want to make them consistent with their APIs but yeah mentioning as base will help | 14:27 |
| dansmith | ack | 14:28 |
| gmann | dansmith: also one thing to confirm, we do not need any configurable nob to switch quota right? for existing way like nova we need via dB driver configuration but for glance it is default enabled right? | 14:28 |
| dansmith | no, | 14:28 |
| dansmith | because glance has existing limits, they're just static in the config and not per-project | 14:28 |
| dansmith | so the default is still those for the time being, and I'm not sure it's really necessary to force them to use unified limits if they currently don't really need quota-ing | 14:29 |
| gmann | ok | 14:29 |
| dansmith | it's more work to do them in keystone if they really just want stop-the-bleeding limits, but I could be convinced otherwise | 14:29 |
| dansmith | if more projects move to unified-limits then it'd be easier to say that we require it only I think | 14:30 |
| gmann | yeah, make sense. | 14:30 |
| dansmith | also other projects gain a lot more by moving to keystone by default, because they can drop existing code, but not really so in glance | 14:30 |
| opendevreview | Dan Smith proposed openstack/project-team-guide master: Amend unified-limits technical guide https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/834005 | 14:32 |
| dansmith | I was very comma conscious, so be nice spotz_ :) | 14:33 |
| dansmith | or, gentle I should say | 14:33 |
| spotz_ | gmann dansmith - just an FYI from the RDO meeting looks like there's been ongoing issues with Sahara master branch. Just wanted to report it as it was the first I was hearig | 14:33 |
| spotz_ | hehe | 14:33 |
| dansmith | spotz_: what does that mean? | 14:33 |
| dansmith | spotz_: like gate-health test failures you mean? | 14:34 |
| spotz_ | last issue after oslo.cache is making it to fail even unit tests | 14:35 |
| spotz_ | amoralej | 14:35 |
| spotz_ | but before that, scenarios were broken too | 14:35 |
| spotz_ | tkajinam | 14:35 |
| spotz_ | broken jobs are not very specific to sahara these days, though. some projects have less people around and leave their CI broken for a while | 14:35 |
| gmann | spotz_: can you please reachout to Qui, (qiujunting@inspur.com) for sahara ? | 15:11 |
| gmann | not sure about tosky if he has time but he can definitely direct us to active maintainer | 15:12 |
| tosky | I don't think I can provide many more details than what you have already | 15:16 |
| gmann | ok | 15:16 |
| tosky | there have bee a few interactions but you already know all the names of the new cores | 15:20 |
| gmann | for oslo context break, there is fix up https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/sahara/+/833962 | 15:29 |
| gmann | not sure what all broken but again need Qui or other core to merge | 15:30 |
| spotz_ | email sent | 15:50 |
| gmann | thanks | 15:51 |
| fungi | zigo also just reported sahara test failures as a problem for the debian packages of yoga rc1 | 16:11 |
| fungi | (along with magnum, murano, trove and zaqar) | 16:12 |
| *** Guest2315 is now known as diablo_rojo | 16:21 | |
| spotz_ | gmann dansmith - want me to add the +w to the unified limits doc? | 20:43 |
| gmann | spotz_: it is good from my side. we can merge it until dansmith want more reviews there (I saw he added johnthetubaguy[m] in reviewer list). otherwise it can be amended for more details later if needed. | 20:48 |
| dansmith | gmann: I did that because I had him on the original (and melwitt), just for their info.. I imagine melwitt would have commented by now if she had comments, but I don't suspect we'll hear from johnthetubaguy[m] in short order | 20:49 |
| dansmith | so we could wait for a signal from melwitt if you want, but otherwise I'm good | 20:49 |
| dansmith | I can certainly keep amending if things come up too | 20:49 |
| dansmith | I'm in no rush either | 20:50 |
| gmann | ok. sounds good. let's wait for melwitt +1 as she can/might review soon. | 20:51 |
| melwitt | gmann: just acked it, thanks | 21:04 |
| dansmith | thanks melwitt | 21:05 |
| spotz_ | Ok I held off and just did my +2 | 21:06 |
| gmann | thanks melwitt | 21:10 |
| gmann | +w. | 21:10 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/project-team-guide master: Amend unified-limits technical guide https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/834005 | 21:20 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!