| dviroel | sean-k-mooney: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970472 this was the conflict in the other plugin patch, not sure why it didn't failed before, only now in 2025.2 patch. | 00:32 |
|---|---|---|
| dviroel | s/conflict/syntax error | 00:33 |
| *** haleyb is now known as haleyb|out | 00:43 | |
| sean-k-mooney | dviroel: ah the experimental jobs. ya thats odd that it was not an issue before but ok i guess it didnt faul intally because we had not merged the change in the watchre repo at the time but that is just a guess | 02:10 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Fix experimental job names after refactoring watcher jobs https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970472 | 06:14 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 06:28 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 07:11 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 07:16 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 08:14 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher stable/2025.2: Make VM migrations timeout configurable and apply reasonable defaults https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969483 | 08:23 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher stable/2025.2: Make VM resize timeout configurable with migration defaults https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969877 | 08:23 |
| amoralej | for some reason https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969370 didn't trigger the gate pipeline, I suspect adding another +W will work | 08:25 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add spec for improving watcher-dashboard testing https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220 | 08:38 |
| tkajinam | amoralej, isn't that because of https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/969366 in depends-on ? | 08:40 |
| amoralej | tkajinam, damn, i missed that obvious | 08:41 |
| amoralej | actually, we don't need it anymore | 08:41 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: update unit tests for nova_helper module https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969370 | 08:42 |
| amoralej | thanks tkajinam | 08:42 |
| tkajinam | :-) | 08:50 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 08:55 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Skip migrate actions in pre_condition phase https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/966699 | 09:18 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher master: Fix zone migration dst pool and type selection https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/964718 | 09:56 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add spec for improving watcher-dashboard testing https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220 | 10:06 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 10:24 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher master: Fix zone migration dst pool and type selection https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/964718 | 11:16 |
| dviroel | sean-k-mooney: hey o/ - can you revote on this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/968779 - I added a temp alias for aetos job, since aetos project has this job running in their pipeline too | 11:41 |
| dviroel | i plan to backport this https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/aetos/+/970468 too once we merge the 2025.2 change | 11:43 |
| amoralej | Watcher meeting is starting in 15 minutes, remember to add your topics to the agenda in https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-watcher-irc-meeting | 11:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | dviroel: sure done | 11:48 |
| dviroel | ty | 11:48 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add spec for Audit Pipeline feature https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/969840 | 11:57 |
| amoralej | meeting time! | 12:01 |
| amoralej | #startmeeting Watcher meeting 11-Dec-2025 | 12:01 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Thu Dec 11 12:01:51 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is amoralej. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 12:01 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 12:01 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025' | 12:01 |
| amoralej | who is around today? | 12:02 |
| rlandy | o/ | 12:02 |
| morenod | o/ | 12:02 |
| jgilaber | o/ | 12:02 |
| dviroel | o/ | 12:02 |
| amoralej | courtesy ping: sean-k-mooney chandankumar | 12:03 |
| chandankumar | o/ | 12:03 |
| amoralej | let's start with the agenda | 12:04 |
| amoralej | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-watcher-irc-meeting#L23 | 12:04 |
| amoralej | #topic new blueprint for improving watcher-dashboard testing | 12:04 |
| amoralej | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/watcher-dashboard-unit-integration-testing | 12:05 |
| amoralej | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220 | 12:05 |
| chandankumar | amoralej: I will take it from here | 12:05 |
| amoralej | sure, go ahead | 12:05 |
| chandankumar | As per the last month irc meeting on Updates on Pytest vs PTI discussion topic | 12:05 |
| chandankumar | https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-watcher/%23openstack-watcher.2025-11-13.log.html#openstack-watcher.2025-11-13.log.html#t2025-11-13T12:21:50 | 12:05 |
| chandankumar | We have to propose a spec for ui testing for watcher-dashboard. | 12:05 |
| chandankumar | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220 | 12:06 |
| chandankumar | this spec propose the layout for watcher-dashboard api/dashboard unit testing based on django test framework and it's wrapper in horizon as well as integration/e2e test based on selenium/playwright. | 12:06 |
| chandankumar | we also have to do a poc for both selenium and playwright. | 12:06 |
| chandankumar | Below is the poc code for the same. | 12:07 |
| chandankumar | The only assumption is that chromium-browser needs to be installed locally. I had issues with firefox gecko driver so went with chromium. | 12:07 |
| chandankumar | 970353: [poc]Add Playwright-based E2E testing framework | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353 | 12:07 |
| chandankumar | 970573: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 patchset 4 working locally | 12:07 |
| chandankumar | The commit message of both poc contains how to run locally. | 12:07 |
| chandankumar | It will generate screenshots in watcher-dashboard repo for each UI interaction. | 12:07 |
| sean-k-mooney | o/ | 12:08 |
| chandankumar | both poc tests creating audit template, create audit, check for action plan and then delete it as a user workflow | 12:08 |
| chandankumar | Here is my analysis of both the tools: https://gist.github.com/raukadah/a1fe328770af6ddeb860c255632d1b02 | 12:09 |
| chandankumar | I am still trying to make selenium one working in ci. | 12:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | so ironic had to swap to using firefox to get it to work in ci i think | 12:10 |
| amoralej | i understand manila-ui has selenium job running? | 12:10 |
| chandankumar | amoralej: yes, | 12:10 |
| amoralej | with chromium? | 12:10 |
| chandankumar | amoralej: i copied the horizon integration tests playbook and modified some of them for chromium | 12:10 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: I will check the ironic one | 12:11 |
| chandankumar | here is the playwright one https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/dc5ea2f364fd42fb9a43b2011980c67a | 12:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic/+/961434 | 12:11 |
| chandankumar | playwright has alll the batteries like browser driver bundled in it | 12:12 |
| chandankumar | we can install it in runtime | 12:12 |
| amoralej | it'd be good to be aligned with other jobs, I guess | 12:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | on the packaging side we woudl jsut use it form pypi proably via devstack in the job | 12:12 |
| chandankumar | playwright test log: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/dc5ea2f364fd42fb9a43b2011980c67a/log/job-output.txt#30276 | 12:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | "playwright" | 12:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | i.e. we woudl likely avoid using the disto version | 12:13 |
| chandankumar | https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/dc5ea2f364fd42fb9a43b2011980c67a/log/job-output.txt#30228 - playwright installing needed drivers | 12:13 |
| chandankumar | playwright is not packaged in rpm based distro, installing it from pypi works fine with chromium | 12:13 |
| amoralej | also, it's not in https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/master/global-requirements.txt | 12:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | correct adding it is soemthing we will have to do but that not hard | 12:14 |
| amoralej | yep | 12:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: how did you find working with each solution | 12:14 |
| chandankumar | for firefox, it complains about missing libraries and it does work with the current libraries of Fedora 43 | 12:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | you provided a summary of the capablity | 12:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | but DX wise what did you think of the developer experince | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | playwright one is easier to work as it's documentation with examples is very nice | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | one can start writting by just following the doc | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | in terms of debugging also, it have nice support | 12:15 |
| sean-k-mooney | that was my perceptiohn form readign the docs but i did not have time to try doing it | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | if a user does not know playwright , they can use playwright codegen | 12:16 |
| amoralej | i was about to ask about codegen | 12:16 |
| amoralej | it works fine? i like that | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | https://gist.github.com/raukadah/10297ff008efbcb17308eec8a17ef625 | 12:16 |
| sean-k-mooney | the ohter thing of note is there is a playwright mcp and api is better trained on playwright | 12:16 |
| sean-k-mooney | so i thihnk tooling wise that is a + | 12:17 |
| chandankumar | "playwright codegen http://10.0.78.89/dashboard/auth/login/ --target=python -o test.py" | 12:17 |
| sean-k-mooney | https://gist.github.com/raukadah/10297ff008efbcb17308eec8a17ef625 is the output of the code gen? | 12:18 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: yes | 12:18 |
| chandankumar | it will open a browser with url, we need to navigate and we can tweak elements it will generate the code | 12:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | did it auto add cliong on audit templates aund using dbumy values | 12:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | oh | 12:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | sorry | 12:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | that was it recordign you doing that | 12:19 |
| chandankumar | it was recording what I was doing on the ui | 12:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | so it popped open a broser and recoreded all the step you did and created a file to do that | 12:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | ya that is very nice | 12:20 |
| chandankumar | yes correct | 12:20 |
| amoralej | +1 i like that :) | 12:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | obviulsy you would need to go in an dadd some asserts but the fact it does the boler plat for the navigation is very helpful | 12:20 |
| amoralej | yes | 12:21 |
| chandankumar | https://github.com/seleniumbase/SeleniumBase another selenium project, which have something like codegen but I have not tried it | 12:21 |
| sean-k-mooney | playwright also has built in suport for using webkit too without needing a fully browser | 12:21 |
| chandankumar | I tried it with browser and headless mode, we have screenshots in both cases | 12:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | the webkit verison can run headless i bleive and work on mac also as a stand in for safari testing | 12:22 |
| chandankumar | playwright creates a zip file with all the data for further debugging and tracing | 12:23 |
| sean-k-mooney | not that i care too much about testing this in every possibel combinition just noting that it supprot all 3 major browser engines (chromn, firefox and webkit) | 12:23 |
| chandankumar | good point, I will add this criteria in my spec | 12:23 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: i belive it can also create a video file of failed tests but i have not looked at that in detail | 12:23 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: video file one I have not tested it | 12:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: well it snot so much a critiva but i like that its not a limitation | 12:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | i.e. it doesnt only work with one browser | 12:24 |
| chandankumar | it was downloaidng ffmpeg-linux. but I need to check that one | 12:24 |
| chandankumar | from ci log https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/dc5ea2f364fd42fb9a43b2011980c67a/log/job-output.txt#30276 | 12:25 |
| chandankumar | we can see the debug in realtime what playwright is doing | 12:25 |
| sean-k-mooney | right so form watching some youtube videos on it i belive you can set it up to recored the browser session and save it as an mp4 or simialr when a test fails so you can then review it | 12:25 |
| chandankumar | I will try that | 12:25 |
| sean-k-mooney | i know it has a screenshot mode which seleinam also supprot too fro smaller output | 12:26 |
| sean-k-mooney | those baseiclly take sceenshot when they are makign assert or they detect changes | 12:26 |
| chandankumar | we need to tell the test when to take screenshot | 12:27 |
| sean-k-mooney | ack | 12:27 |
| amoralej | we don't have the screenshots in the logs in https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/dc5ea2f364fd42fb9a43b2011980c67a/log/ | 12:27 |
| amoralej | right? | 12:27 |
| chandankumar | yes, I have not collected it | 12:27 |
| sean-k-mooney | we would have to copy them in the job ya | 12:27 |
| sean-k-mooney | which we can do | 12:27 |
| amoralej | yep | 12:27 |
| chandankumar | I will update the spec with browser support, screenshot collection in ci log and video output after failure | 12:28 |
| amoralej | one question about the process, https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220/ is about creating the poc and establishing the comparison and the goal | 12:28 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: so i need to look at both implementions | 12:28 |
| amoralej | so i understand can/should be approved without need of finishing the pocs, right? | 12:29 |
| chandankumar | amoralej: good question, I was about to ask for the same | 12:29 |
| amoralej | or want to add the result of the decission i nthe same spec? | 12:29 |
| sean-k-mooney | but what your geneal recommendation. can we get that codeifed into the spec | 12:29 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: i woudl liek use to document the reaosn why we choose one or the other in the spec and put the non selected one in the alternitives | 12:30 |
| amoralej | ack, works for me | 12:30 |
| sean-k-mooney | we shoudl also refence https://opendev.org/openstack/watcher-specs/src/branch/master/specs/2026.1/approved/testing-and-codequality.rst | 12:31 |
| sean-k-mooney | or rahter make sure its consitent | 12:31 |
| chandankumar | in inital version of the spec, I have added the code in the spec itself https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220/2/specs/2026.1/approved/improve-watcher-dashboard-ui-testing.rst | 12:31 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: sure will add it to reference | 12:32 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: im just bring that up as the deictory stucutre was propsoed in https://opendev.org/openstack/watcher-specs/src/branch/master/specs/2026.1/approved/testing-and-codequality.rst | 12:32 |
| sean-k-mooney | to make room for the addtion of ui tests | 12:32 |
| sean-k-mooney | so we shoudl make sure https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220/5/specs/2026.1/approved/improve-watcher-dashboard-ui-testing.rst#77 fits with that | 12:33 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think it does | 12:33 |
| sean-k-mooney | do we have more on this topic for today | 12:34 |
| chandankumar | nope | 12:34 |
| amoralej | thanks chandankumar | 12:34 |
| amoralej | let's move to the next topic | 12:34 |
| chandankumar | thank you sean-k-mooney amoralej for inputs! | 12:34 |
| amoralej | great progress on this! | 12:34 |
| sean-k-mooney | ok lets revisit next week and also review the spec asnc | 12:34 |
| dviroel | chandankumar++ | 12:34 |
| amoralej | #topic Meeting schedule proposal -> 2026 | 12:34 |
| amoralej | rlandy, you want to present this topic? | 12:35 |
| rlandy | yep - I added that ... so we have a lot of vacation over the next couple of weeks | 12:35 |
| rlandy | The proposal is to have the meeting next week | 12:35 |
| rlandy | skip the week of the 25 and the 1st | 12:35 |
| rlandy | resume on the 8th | 12:35 |
| dviroel | +1 on dec 18th be the last meeting of this year | 12:35 |
| sean-k-mooney | +1 | 12:36 |
| jgilaber | +1 to the plan | 12:36 |
| chandankumar | +1 | 12:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | that is what i was thinkign looking at my calandar too | 12:36 |
| amoralej | +1 | 12:36 |
| rlandy | ok - I can chair the meeting on Jan 8th since dviroel asked | 12:36 |
| rlandy | amoralej, that is all I had there - thank you | 12:36 |
| amoralej | #agreed Watcher meetings on Dec 25th and Jan 1st will be cancelled | 12:37 |
| amoralej | #agreed Watcher will resume regular meeting schedule on Jan 8th | 12:37 |
| amoralej | let's move on | 12:37 |
| amoralej | #topic Audit Pipeline spec proposal | 12:37 |
| dviroel | o/ | 12:38 |
| dviroel | I would like to highlight that there is a new spec proposal | 12:38 |
| dviroel | we can further discuss the details in the spec itself if folks agree | 12:38 |
| dviroel | this is already a second version of the proposal | 12:38 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/969840 | 12:38 |
| dviroel | the first proposal was building a solution reusing all existing resources and apis, which ended to be using apis out of their real scope | 12:39 |
| dviroel | now we have a second version with the following proposal: | 12:39 |
| dviroel | 1) extend audit-template to include strategy input parameters (this will allow us to use templates to build a pipeline of strategies) | 12:39 |
| dviroel | 2) a new audit pipeline resource, which accepts multiple audit-templates as input, to build a pipeline | 12:40 |
| dviroel | 3) a mutable data cluster model that updates its resources states/properties between strategy executions | 12:40 |
| dviroel | 4) a new planner that merges multiple solutions to build a single optimize action plan | 12:40 |
| dviroel | these are the most important changes proposed | 12:40 |
| dviroel | we may have some corner cases not covered there yet | 12:41 |
| dviroel | if we start to agree on a initial proposal, I may start a small poc based on that too | 12:41 |
| dviroel | i request that you folks take a look in this spec's proposal and see if is a reasonable proposal and if we are missing something to cover there | 12:42 |
| sean-k-mooney | at a very high level that sound more reasonable and inlien with the existing data model | 12:42 |
| sean-k-mooney | but the detail of 3 and 4 are were the complication will lie | 12:42 |
| sean-k-mooney | 1 i thikn is independtly useful | 12:43 |
| amoralej | yep, from api pov looks better | 12:43 |
| jgilaber | sounds reasonable and I still need to go through the spec, but does the mutable data model cover the metrics? | 12:43 |
| amoralej | in 1, we could add that also for regular audits from audittemplates ? | 12:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | so i think even if we completed that in this cycle that woudl eb nice, we may want to have that be its own mini spec and just proceed with that in parallel | 12:44 |
| dviroel | amoralej: yes we can | 12:44 |
| amoralej | ok | 12:44 |
| sean-k-mooney | so for 1 i woudl call it default_parmaters and allow the current parmater in teh audit to overried the template | 12:45 |
| dviroel | ack, we can spli, since the success of the audit-template changes don't depends on the pipeline feature | 12:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | that would allwo use to reuse it for any audit type | 12:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | dviroel: we dont nessisarly ned to split the spec althoguh we can | 12:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | i just think we could split the impemetion and deliver the template changes first | 12:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | to avoid one big reivew at the end of the cycle | 12:46 |
| dviroel | ack, sure, that can be added to this spec too. | 12:46 |
| dviroel | as a 1st phase work items | 12:46 |
| chandankumar | Does it also require changes in watcher-dashboard ? | 12:46 |
| sean-k-mooney | it will eventually | 12:47 |
| amoralej | yep | 12:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | i am not sure that has to hapen in the same cycle | 12:47 |
| amoralej | and new microversion | 12:47 |
| chandankumar | ok | 12:47 |
| dviroel | ack, it would be a next phase | 12:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | yes 2 new microveriosn more then likely if we split it | 12:47 |
| amoralej | we could have one microversion only for 1, so it's independent | 12:47 |
| dviroel | but yeah, I am not covering that in the spec | 12:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | right so microverion to add the parmeter to the template | 12:48 |
| sean-k-mooney | and a secodn one for the new pipeline resouces | 12:48 |
| amoralej | +1 | 12:48 |
| dviroel | +1 better to have 2 microversions | 12:48 |
| sean-k-mooney | what we woudl want to compelt htis cycle is the cli supprot | 12:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | so watcher client extneion to use the new api resouce | 12:49 |
| dviroel | +1 | 12:49 |
| amoralej | dviroel, we can keep discussing in the spec? or you'd like to highlight something else on the topic? | 12:51 |
| dviroel | right, so 3) and 4) are the more complicated part and I request you folks to take a look | 12:51 |
| dviroel | but we don't need to discuss here right now, yes | 12:51 |
| amoralej | ok, thanks | 12:51 |
| dviroel | we can continue in the patch itself | 12:51 |
| amoralej | let's move to the reviews | 12:52 |
| amoralej | #topic reviews | 12:52 |
| dviroel | or ping me in the channel for any further question | 12:52 |
| dviroel | tks amoralej | 12:52 |
| amoralej | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970440 | 12:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | you spec goes 1,2,4,5 by the way :P | 12:52 |
| amoralej | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970446 | 12:52 |
| amoralej | so that's about ruff | 12:52 |
| sean-k-mooney | ah thats what i just added | 12:52 |
| amoralej | yep | 12:53 |
| * dviroel sean-k-mooney oops :) | 12:53 | |
| sean-k-mooney | ya so takashi notice that on the oslo side and in our defintions | 12:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | we dont have E5 the line lenght check enabled | 12:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | now for us that is currently intentional | 12:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | because we are suign autopep8 to do the formating and linelenght enforcement | 12:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | but i kind of wanted to check in and see how people felt on 2 topics converging on ruff for evetything, and if we dont for now fi we want to enable the lenght check in ruff | 12:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | even if autopep8 is already doing it | 12:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | one thing that i notcied when reviewing tkajinam's patch was https://github.com/openstack/watcher/blob/master/tox.ini#L139 | 12:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | the *sqlalchemy/alembic/versions/* | 12:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | part is disabling style checkign for the alembic migrations | 12:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | whic i dont know of a good reason to do i think its just there historically | 12:56 |
| amoralej | likely | 12:57 |
| amoralej | so, i'd be inclined to accept those patchs even if we are still using autopep8 | 12:58 |
| sean-k-mooney | im still plannign to add the pre-commit hooks an ruff check to all repos this cycle as we dicussed in the ptg. ill proably try and do that next week | 12:58 |
| jgilaber | I'm +1 on both topics, I've tried the ruff formatter locally and I like it | 12:58 |
| sean-k-mooney | but i wanted to float the idea of adopting ruff for evertything later in teh cycle and choosing when and see how peopel felt | 12:59 |
| jgilaber | to enable it we'll need to do it in a few patches I guess, it will result in quite a lot of changes | 12:59 |
| amoralej | will it require many changes in code format? | 12:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: that i need to check but its just running the tool | 13:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | the approch i was takign was use ruff check to adress all lint issues | 13:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | so that swapign to ruff for formating shoudl just be whitespace changes for the most part | 13:00 |
| amoralej | we are out of time | 13:01 |
| sean-k-mooney | i was thinkign of either doign it just after stable/2026.1 is created and master is start of 2026.2 or at milestone 2 | 13:01 |
| sean-k-mooney | ya we dont need to decied now | 13:01 |
| amoralej | starting of next release in master looks like a good idea, imo | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | if we are ok with the E5 checks for now we can just review them and loop back to this later | 13:02 |
| dviroel | +1 on E5 | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | ya i wanted to fidn a time where we woudl not be conflicitng with tryign to get work complete or the code released | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | cool that all i had on that | 13:02 |
| amoralej | thanks | 13:03 |
| amoralej | so, wrt the bug triage, we have some bugs, but in some of them there are already patches or discussion ongoing | 13:03 |
| amoralej | so i guess we can keep working on them asynchronously and discuss in next meeting if needed | 13:04 |
| dviroel | +1 | 13:04 |
| amoralej | I'd like to highlight https://bugs.launchpad.net/watcher/+bug/2134534 which i sent patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970396 if you have a chance | 13:04 |
| amoralej | i expect it to be an easy fix | 13:05 |
| amoralej | so we have volunteer to chair next meeting already | 13:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | oh ya that looks like a clear bug | 13:06 |
| amoralej | #info dviroel will chair next meeting | 13:06 |
| dviroel | :) | 13:06 |
| amoralej | yes, i found it while working in the service_monitor for the applier | 13:06 |
| amoralej | so, i think we can close the mtg here | 13:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | i just set it to high since we are out of time because of the sacling implication but fee free to update it to medium if you think high is not correct | 13:07 |
| sean-k-mooney | since you have a patch can you assign it to yourself | 13:07 |
| amoralej | i think high is good | 13:07 |
| amoralej | so thank you for joining! | 13:08 |
| amoralej | #endmeeting | 13:08 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Thu Dec 11 13:08:16 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 13:08 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025/2025/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025.2025-12-11-12.01.html | 13:08 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025/2025/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025.2025-12-11-12.01.txt | 13:08 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025/2025/watcher_meeting_11_dec_2025.2025-12-11-12.01.log.html | 13:08 |
| morenod | thanks amoralej! | 13:08 |
| jgilaber | thanks amoralej! | 13:08 |
| dviroel | amoralej++ | 13:08 |
| chandankumar | amoralej++ | 13:10 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Refactor service monitor for decision-engine https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970612 | 13:10 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Assign hostname to ActionPlan when picked-up https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970613 | 13:10 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Add service monitor for the Applier service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970614 | 13:10 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/watcher stable/2025.2: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI job definitions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/968779 | 13:13 |
| amoralej | sean-k-mooney, jgilaber i lost your votes in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969370 by fixing the commit message | 13:14 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 13:14 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 14:09 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI jobs for stable branches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 | 14:13 |
| tkajinam | o/ I wonder if https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/955652 can get some attention ? json format support is being removed from oslo.policy soon | 14:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | oh are we not using yaml in the daashbaord already | 14:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | sure ill take a look later | 14:24 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 14:30 |
| tkajinam | sean-k-mooney, thanks ! | 15:03 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add specification for migrating Watcher to OpenStackSDK https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/968023 | 15:27 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Refactor service monitor for decision-engine https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970612 | 15:58 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Assign hostname to ActionPlan when picked-up https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970613 | 15:58 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher master: Add service monitor for the Applier service https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970614 | 15:58 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI jobs for stable branches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 | 16:53 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI jobs for stable branches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 | 17:06 |
| dviroel | jgilaber: sean-k-mooney: next ci job refactoring is 2025.1 patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/969137 (I still can't get the tempest-plugin change work with a depends on it) | 17:26 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI jobs for stable branches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 | 17:32 |
| *** haleyb is now known as haleyb|out | 17:43 | |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher stable/2024.2: [stable-only] Consolidate and improve Zuul CI job definitions https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/970385 | 19:46 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Remove url tags from README https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970695 | 20:38 |
| opendevreview | Ivan Anfimov proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Remove url tags from README https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970695 | 20:38 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!