| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc]Add Playwright-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353 | 06:09 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc]Add Playwright-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353 | 06:14 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher stable/2025.2: update unit tests for nova_helper module https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/971397 | 08:39 |
| opendevreview | Alfredo Moralejo proposed openstack/watcher stable/2025.2: Retry calls to nova API when connection errors are detected https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/971398 | 08:39 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 09:57 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc]Add Playwright-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353 | 10:01 |
| opendevreview | chandan kumar proposed openstack/watcher-dashboard master: [poc] Add Selenium-based E2E testing framework https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970573 | 10:30 |
| dviroel | hi all, watcher meeting will start in 7 min - please add your topics to https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-watcher-irc-meeting#L27 - tks | 11:53 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher master: Remove unused methods from NovaHelper https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/971219 | 11:57 |
| dviroel | #startmeeting watcher | 12:01 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Thu Dec 18 12:01:11 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dviroel. 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' | 12:01 |
| dviroel | hi all o/ - who is around today? | 12:01 |
| morenod | o/ | 12:01 |
| rlandy | o/ | 12:01 |
| chandankumar | o/ | 12:01 |
| jgilaber | o/ | 12:01 |
| dviroel | courtesy ping: amoralej sean-k-mooney | 12:02 |
| amoralej | o/ | 12:03 |
| dviroel | I think that we have a lot to cover today, so let's start | 12:03 |
| dviroel | today's meeting agenda: | 12:03 |
| dviroel | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-watcher-irc-meeting#L27 (Meeting agenda) | 12:03 |
| dviroel | feel free to add your own topics to the agenda | 12:03 |
| dviroel | #topic Announcements | 12:03 |
| dviroel | just to announce that we will skip the next 2 meetings, due to holidays and ptos | 12:04 |
| dviroel | dec 25th and jan 1st meetings are cancelled | 12:04 |
| dviroel | this is the last one of this year | 12:04 |
| dviroel | and we will meet again on Jan 8th | 12:05 |
| dviroel | I can send a short email to the ML just to announce that, after this meeting | 12:05 |
| dviroel | anyone has any other announcement? | 12:05 |
| dviroel | ack, lets start with | 12:06 |
| dviroel | #topic unused methods in nova_helper | 12:06 |
| dviroel | hey jgilaber o/ | 12:06 |
| jgilaber | hey! | 12:06 |
| jgilaber | I noticed while reviewing some patches that there are a few methods on nova_helper that are not used | 12:06 |
| jgilaber | only in unit tests | 12:07 |
| jgilaber | I opened a patch to remove them, but I was wondering if we need to follow any process for removing them other than merging the patch | 12:07 |
| jgilaber | we don't need to deprecate them before removal right? | 12:07 |
| sean-k-mooney | o/ | 12:08 |
| dviroel | they could be used by other plugins around, and it is possible to mark them as deprecated before actually removing | 12:09 |
| dviroel | the change that you mention is: | 12:10 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/971219 | 12:10 |
| sean-k-mooney | so we dont really ahve a conrtact with external plugins | 12:11 |
| amoralej | For this particular case, I doubt that those are used outside as come from stuff that was removed in the past | 12:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | if its not used in tree we can remove it | 12:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | but we shoudl have a release note in the upgrades section | 12:11 |
| dviroel | i really doubt that someone else is using that too | 12:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | we could deprecate and then remvoe | 12:11 |
| jgilaber | sean-k-mooney, thanks that's what I wanted to cofirm | 12:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | but but these are all internal apis | 12:12 |
| jgilaber | I got the feeling that was the case | 12:12 |
| jgilaber | I'll add a release note to the patch | 12:12 |
| amoralej | good point about the the release note | 12:12 |
| jgilaber | thanks all, that is what I had about this topic, I'll update the patch and we can discuss there | 12:13 |
| dviroel | +1 | 12:13 |
| dviroel | thanks jgilaber | 12:13 |
| dviroel | next topic | 12:14 |
| dviroel | #topic : Updates on playwright/selenium poc | 12:14 |
| chandankumar | I will take it from here | 12:14 |
| dviroel | chandankumar: please, tks | 12:14 |
| chandankumar | From last meeting discussion on watcher-dashboard ui testing spec proposal https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/970220 | 12:14 |
| chandankumar | Here are some of the updates on both pocs | 12:14 |
| chandankumar | playwright pocs| https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353 now uses: | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - openstacksdk and os_cloud for getting username/password. | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - Uses watcherclient to delete created audit/templates during test run as it is much faster then deleting stuff from UI. | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | All artifacts are stored in playwright directory created under project root dir: https://storage.bhs.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_4eb/openstack/4eb6eb3471564708bc0baa709a7d120d/controller/logs/index.html | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - Video and tracing will be generated with retain on failure | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - In CI, we are using webkit as a default browser | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - Re-wrote the whole code based on oslotest, tempest cleanup, fixtures and page object model borrowed from horizon selenium page object model(POM). | 12:15 |
| chandankumar | - One of the cons: Need sudo access in tox.ini to install missing deps for webkit by using playwright install-deps. | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | - best practices: https://playwright.dev/docs/best-practices based on nodejs ,python one does not exist | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | coming on selenium poc: | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | it is now working in ci with Xvfb virtual display setup with firefox headless (used by horizon also for CI testing), Does not work with chrome and firefox in CI | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | Reusing horizon firefox binary and video recorder module for selenium video recording: | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | - selenium is very peculiar with firefox and geckodriver version | 12:16 |
| chandankumar | - for video generation, we need to install ffmpeg while playwright download its own binary | 12:17 |
| chandankumar | - in ubuntu, snap/deb package does not work, you can see all the workaround in the code | 12:17 |
| chandankumar | - All artifacts are stored in selenium directory created under project root dir with screenshot and video always generated: https://be16c502bd559ea2be0a-e7edb05e06a1172316eb4206e173039e.ssl.cf5.rackcdn.com/openstack/790ef53ba62240c48a1f197e809419a4/controller/logs/selenium/index.html | 12:17 |
| chandankumar | Please have a look at both poc, decide on the choice of tool, then I will solidify the work. | 12:17 |
| chandankumar | thank you sean-k-mooney for the feedback on both poc. | 12:17 |
| dviroel | chandankumar: thanks for all the hard work and time on this | 12:18 |
| amoralej | everything i heard seems positive for playwright, other than it's new in openstack, seems positive, right? | 12:19 |
| chandankumar | yes | 12:19 |
| chandankumar | nodejs projects uses a lot of playwright | 12:19 |
| dviroel | chandankumar: is there a etherpad that we could dump all this important info? It may be interesting for us and for any other team | 12:20 |
| dviroel | or are you adding everything to the spec? | 12:20 |
| chandankumar | based on last discussion, we want to add this in the spec i think. | 12:20 |
| chandankumar | I have not added it there yet | 12:21 |
| chandankumar | Based on test run time, there are not much difference I see | 12:21 |
| chandankumar | I might be writting wrong way, need feedback from UI /testing folks | 12:21 |
| chandankumar | once the tool is decided, I will dump all info in spec | 12:22 |
| amoralej | Could be selenium and playwright be executed in the same job? I mean, there my be cases where tests for different plugins would be executed in the same jobs, some in selenium and some in playwright | 12:22 |
| amoralej | would that be possible? | 12:22 |
| chandankumar | if we create two tox targets then yes, I think | 12:22 |
| amoralej | actually, two different test executions, i'd say | 12:23 |
| amoralej | git clone ..../watcher-dashboard ; git clone .../manila-ui ; tox ... ; tox ... | 12:23 |
| amoralej | or something like that | 12:23 |
| chandankumar | I think yes | 12:24 |
| chandankumar | playwright keep their downloaded binary at different places, selenium one has different browser binary path | 12:25 |
| amoralej | would it be convenient to involve someone from the horizon team in the discussion? | 12:25 |
| chandankumar | good idea, I will pass both the implementation poc and spec to Jan Jasek and let's see what they say. | 12:27 |
| amoralej | I suspect they may be interested on this work at least | 12:28 |
| jgilaber | what would be the usecase for running both selenium and playwright? running the same tests on both? using some feature that is available in one but not the other? | 12:28 |
| amoralej | each plugin has its own tests | 12:28 |
| chandankumar | it might be useful for downstream testing where user want to run manila as well as watcher dashboard tests together | 12:28 |
| amoralej | ^ that's what i was thinking of | 12:29 |
| amoralej | together, as in the same job, not in the same test runner | 12:29 |
| jgilaber | that is testing from horizon then, not watcher-dashboard repo? | 12:29 |
| amoralej | it would run tests from different repos, each one for it's specific functionalities | 12:30 |
| jgilaber | ok, but this is not a job that we would add in the watcher-dashboard ci right? | 12:31 |
| amoralej | nop | 12:32 |
| amoralej | one more that I just thought (sorry), one of the issues in ui testing is what happens when style theme is changed. Would be any difference between using selenium and playwright? | 12:32 |
| jgilaber | ack, I got confused, sorry | 12:32 |
| dviroel | chandankumar: ok, anything else that we need to discuss here in the meeting? | 12:34 |
| chandankumar | amoralej: good point, I have not checked that angle. Since playwright rely on UI locators, it may work based on different themes | 12:34 |
| amoralej | may be worthy to do a quick test | 12:34 |
| chandankumar | but I will cross verify | 12:34 |
| chandankumar | dviroel: nope, I will provide next update in next meeting , | 12:34 |
| amoralej | great job chandankumar++ | 12:35 |
| chandankumar | and can discuss on how to decide on tool finalization | 12:35 |
| dviroel | ack, and feedbacks are welcome in all 3 changes (spec and pocs) | 12:35 |
| dviroel | thanks chandankumar++ | 12:35 |
| dviroel | so I will move to the next topic | 12:36 |
| chandankumar | thank you everyone! | 12:36 |
| dviroel | #topic Audit Pipeline spec updates | 12:36 |
| dviroel | this is a follow up from previous meeting | 12:36 |
| dviroel | thank you all for providing valuable feebacks in the spec review | 12:37 |
| dviroel | I recently proposed a new patchset for this spec (yesterday) | 12:37 |
| dviroel | that includes a metric caching proposal, which was an idea from sean-k-mooney to address the issue with metrics on the cascade model | 12:38 |
| dviroel | I added a new section too, for the pipeline strategy/execution/mode/planner/etc, which allows audit pipeline be further extended in future | 12:38 |
| dviroel | it is getting a complex proposal in the end | 12:39 |
| dviroel | so I invite you folks to revisit again while you are still around :) | 12:40 |
| amoralej | I need to read the last PS, sorry i didn't before the meeting | 12:40 |
| dviroel | np amoralej, it was recently sent | 12:40 |
| dviroel | in general, our deadline for specs approval is M2 (jan 8th) | 12:41 |
| dviroel | so we may decide the future of the open specs until there, and if needed we can ask for a 1week deadline extension | 12:41 |
| dviroel | but lets see how it goes | 12:41 |
| dviroel | do you folks have any question about that spec? or should we move forward? | 12:42 |
| dviroel | ack, let move to the next topic | 12:43 |
| dviroel | #topic New blueprints | 12:44 |
| dviroel | New blueprint to add osprofiler | 12:44 |
| dviroel | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/osprofiler-in-watcher | 12:44 |
| amoralej | I created a blueprint about adding osprofiler | 12:44 |
| amoralej | my main question is what to do with the profiler for the watcher-api, osprofiler relies on PasteDeploy pipelines | 12:45 |
| amoralej | which we don't have in watcher, and iiuc openstack is willing to get rid of | 12:45 |
| dviroel | didn't we removed that middleware recently? | 12:46 |
| amoralej | https://docs.openstack.org/osprofiler/latest/user/integration.html | 12:46 |
| amoralej | dunno, tbh | 12:47 |
| amoralej | I've just checked that we don's ship any api-paste.ini config or have code to use it | 12:49 |
| amoralej | I could add support for it as part of this | 12:49 |
| amoralej | but I'm not sure if that's the way to go | 12:49 |
| jgilaber | dviroel, we have a patch for that, but it's not merged yet | 12:49 |
| jgilaber | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/960165 | 12:49 |
| amoralej | yeah, so the dependency is there but it's not implemented at all | 12:50 |
| jgilaber | well it only drops the dependency from the requirements.txt file | 12:50 |
| amoralej | i think it never was | 12:50 |
| jgilaber | yes, looks like it | 12:50 |
| dviroel | right, might be this patch that I remember lookin at | 12:51 |
| amoralej | one option would be to start by adding osprofiler only for the decision-engine and applier which are actually our most interesting cases | 12:51 |
| amoralej | to instrument | 12:51 |
| amoralej | we will not be able to match traces with API calls in that case, but we may still have the traces info | 12:51 |
| dviroel | ack, we may need to reach other folks or team to get a better understand on what to do with the api | 12:52 |
| amoralej | who maintaines osprofiler? it's part of oslo? | 12:52 |
| dviroel | I think that we can still maintain everything in the same blueprint | 12:52 |
| amoralej | yes, that's my intent | 12:53 |
| amoralej | I think i can start by sending a question to the ML | 12:53 |
| dviroel | yeah, that would reach more people | 12:54 |
| amoralej | let's see if i can get any ideas about alternatives to using pastedeploy to add it in the api | 12:54 |
| amoralej | i'll follow up in next meetings | 12:55 |
| dviroel | good one, thanks amoralej | 12:55 |
| dviroel | and | 12:55 |
| dviroel | New blueprint to remove current ongoing action cancel | 12:55 |
| dviroel | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/remove-cancel-ongoing-actions | 12:55 |
| amoralej | I created a blueprint for the next step on the action cancel issues we discussed in PTGs | 12:56 |
| amoralej | iiuc we agreed on removing support to cancelling ongoing actions (not actionplans) before we can find a clean implementation | 12:56 |
| amoralej | so the scope of that blueprint is that, removing the existing implementation and documenting it (which currently is not) | 12:57 |
| dviroel | ack, cancelling Actions means killing the thread in eventlet mode, right? | 12:58 |
| amoralej | yes | 12:58 |
| amoralej | :) | 12:58 |
| amoralej | and removing the loop to check the db every second | 12:58 |
| dviroel | but we should still be able to cancel the Action Plan, which will avoid new Actions to start (i think that it check the AP state before starts) | 12:58 |
| amoralej | exactly, that's the idea | 12:59 |
| amoralej | that will only affect the ongoing Actions, the rest stay the same | 12:59 |
| amoralej | pending actions will not start | 12:59 |
| amoralej | I can make it more clean in the blueprint | 12:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | sorry i had a call so i ahve not been tahat active | 12:59 |
| dviroel | ack, there is also an improvement in how we could suspend the Taskflow engine to not start new action/tasks | 12:59 |
| dviroel | but this can be made as part of improvement of cancelling action plans | 13:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej:yes we dont supprot api-paste.ini | 13:00 |
| sean-k-mooney | we likely shoudl not add it either | 13:00 |
| amoralej | dviroel, yep, i expect we will need a new blueprint and maybe spec to reimplement it, including that | 13:01 |
| dviroel | ack | 13:01 |
| amoralej | sean-k-mooney, that's what i guessed, but i'm not sure what's the way to go | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: we can add a config option for it and then exetend our hardcoded pipeline to incldue it if set | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: past and paste deploy are nore really maintianed | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | so i whink we shodul evengully remove both | 13:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | which is why im reluctant to expose api-paste.ini | 13:03 |
| sean-k-mooney | sicne that is oen fo the capbalities that other frameworks lack | 13:03 |
| amoralej | ok, I'll investigate how can i plug it into the pipeline without pastedeploy | 13:03 |
| sean-k-mooney | i.e. declaritive middleware pipeliens | 13:03 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: look at tkajinam's patchs for cors supprot | 13:03 |
| sean-k-mooney | that extended the piplelien | 13:03 |
| sean-k-mooney | on the cancleation topic | 13:04 |
| sean-k-mooney | we likely shoudl have a spec but at this point i think we are out of time for new feautres this cycle | 13:04 |
| sean-k-mooney | so what i woudl recommend is we focus on the propsoed/approved ones | 13:04 |
| amoralej | note the scope of this is only for the short-time fix of removing the hacky implementation | 13:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | and start some POCs for new feature in q1 with the intent of deliving them in 2026.2 rather thin in 2026.1 | 13:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | ack | 13:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | am for now i think the best approch to the cancelation would be to make eventlet and threading work the same | 13:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | i.e. wait for the task to compelte and not start any new tasks once the action plan is canceled | 13:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | so removing the killing of the greentread | 13:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | that we could do as a bug fix | 13:06 |
| amoralej | yes, that's exactly what i was planning for this cycle | 13:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | the spec and blueprint approveal deadlineis january 8th | 13:06 |
| amoralej | actually, that was one of my doubts, if treating it as a bug | 13:06 |
| amoralej | but i'm not sure what's actually the bug to be reported | 13:06 |
| amoralej | we are out of time, we can discuss in the channel after the meeting if you prefer | 13:07 |
| dviroel | agree, the second blueprint could be a bugfix | 13:07 |
| dviroel | ack | 13:07 |
| dviroel | the remaining topics are request for reviews | 13:08 |
| sean-k-mooney | the bug is the deleta in behavior between concurance modes | 13:08 |
| sean-k-mooney | but sure lets dicuss after | 13:08 |
| dviroel | so please folks take a look on this ones: | 13:08 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 (CI refactoring and consolidation) last one | 13:08 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22blueprint-monitor-failed-appliers%22 | 13:08 |
| amoralej | thanks dviroel++ ! | 13:09 |
| dviroel | the watcher-tempest-plugin one is one of the final CI refactoring planned | 13:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | oh its finally passing | 13:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | so we have merged all the backports? | 13:09 |
| dviroel | sean-k-mooney: yes | 13:09 |
| sean-k-mooney | cool in that case +2w | 13:09 |
| dviroel | so | 13:10 |
| dviroel | let's wrap up for the year :) | 13:10 |
| dviroel | we will meet again on Jan 8th | 13:10 |
| dviroel | happy holidays folks o/ | 13:10 |
| dviroel | thank you all for participating | 13:11 |
| dviroel | #endmeeting | 13:11 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Thu Dec 18 13:11:10 2025 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 13:11 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2025/watcher.2025-12-18-12.01.html | 13:11 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2025/watcher.2025-12-18-12.01.txt | 13:11 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2025/watcher.2025-12-18-12.01.log.html | 13:11 |
| morenod | thanks dviroel++, happy holidays | 13:11 |
| jgilaber | thanks dviroel! | 13:11 |
| chandankumar | thanks dviroel ! | 13:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: so regarding https://blueprints.launchpad.net/watcher/+spec/remove-cancel-ongoing-actions | 13:11 |
| sean-k-mooney | if you update the description to say the new cacleation behaivor will be "wait for the running task to complete and cancell all pending task" | 13:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think im ok with approvign it | 13:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | if we want to impove it again next cycle we can | 13:13 |
| sean-k-mooney | effectivly we woudl jsut remove "A new implementation of the cancelling of Ongoing actions will be discussed in a separate blueprint/spec in future." | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | dviroel: jgilaber any concerns with that ^ | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | other wise i woudl say defer thei to 2026.2 and maybe just have a bug for that delta for this cycle | 13:14 |
| amoralej | sure, i can update that if that's fine | 13:14 |
| amoralej | updated | 13:17 |
| jgilaber | no concerns, sounds goog to me | 13:18 |
| sean-k-mooney | ok i have approved the limited scope bluepirnt. i may or may not be back by the 8th | 13:19 |
| sean-k-mooney | in thory it will be my first day back if it finish today | 13:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | otherwise ill be back on the 9th | 13:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | my plan was to finsih today or worlk a half day tomorrow | 13:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | so ill proably be back for the next meeting but i wont get much done between now and then | 13:21 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: Hello, regarding playwright poc code https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-dashboard/+/970353, you were right I overengineered it by introducing so many classes, I am thinking to revert back to something like https://paste.opendev.org/show/bAHoMVpl1SW2Y1jTRCJv/ | 13:23 |
| chandankumar | I am also thinking how an new developer approach towards adding new testing, one generates the code using codegen then incorporate them in the code with out much effort | 13:24 |
| amoralej | thanks sean-k-mooney | 13:25 |
| chandankumar | these two things will make the flow easier for anyone to understand | 13:25 |
| chandankumar | the code | 13:25 |
| chandankumar | what do you think about this? | 13:27 |
| dviroel | i was getting a coffee, but the blueprint lgtm | 13:34 |
| chandankumar | i am also looking into playwright mcp on how to generate test easily by just writting the whole user workflow | 13:49 |
| chandankumar | will add my finding on the spec. | 13:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: ack | 13:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | chandankumar: we dont hav emuch time left this year in general but i wonder are we ready ot commit to the playwright direciton at this point | 13:59 |
| sean-k-mooney | if not i think we shoudl make that descion early in q1 but form what you have show me i think it look pretty clear that it is the user friednly way to provide this testing IMO | 14:00 |
| chandankumar | sean-k-mooney: based on today.s meeting, I need to figure out two things, if we change the horizon theme does playwright testing will work and how to test in downstream env where selenium-ui and playwright tests run in same env | 14:01 |
| chandankumar | *selenium tests | 14:01 |
| chandankumar | taking the decision by q1 also sounds good. we will have more data. | 14:02 |
| chandankumar | I will also share this work with horizon team , we may get feedback on the way we are writting the test | 14:02 |
| sean-k-mooney | well the theme is just css | 14:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | so that shodul not change any of the filed identfires although it may break "snapshot" tests | 14:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | where we compare the pixel output | 14:05 |
| sean-k-mooney | and for downstream we would jsut run the playright and seleneimn test in seperat etest runs | 14:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | in terms of sharing sure but at the end of the day its our dscison on how we progress | 14:07 |
| sean-k-mooney | watcher-dashboard is not a deliveble of the horizon team and they made it pretty clear they didnt want to maintain it so we are optimizing for our ease of matiance | 14:08 |
| chandankumar | for themes, if any test depends on css classes, it may break if it got changed in different theme | 14:08 |
| chandankumar | but I will verify that | 14:08 |
| chandankumar | if we use unique attributes in the test it will work. But I need to dig more there. | 14:09 |
| chandankumar | ok | 14:10 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher master: Remove unused methods from NovaHelper https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/971219 | 14:38 |
| opendevreview | Joan Gilabert proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add specification for migrating Watcher to OpenStackSDK https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/968023 | 15:45 |
| sean-k-mooney | ya we shoudl try not ot depend on the css classes in the tests | 17:12 |
| sean-k-mooney | dviroel: i woudl be ok with moving forward with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/968023 if you agree | 17:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | im not sure whn your going on pto but i think that spec is clsoe enough for joan ot start makeing progress this cycle. im not sure wi we will end up merging any of the changes by FF but its enough to start on the implemetion work i think | 17:37 |
| dviroel | sean-k-mooney: ack, I will finish reviewing it, i will be out only on holidays | 17:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | ok then no rush. ill likely finsih in the next hour or so then be back on the 8th or 9th | 17:57 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/watcher-specs master: Add specification for migrating Watcher to OpenStackSDK https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/968023 | 19:34 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Consolidate and improve Zuul CI jobs for stable branches https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/970378 | 20:28 |
| *** haleyb is now known as haleyb|out | 21:34 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.0.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!