| opendevreview | David proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Add test suite for audit scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/995799 | 08:40 |
|---|---|---|
| opendevreview | David proposed openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin master: Add test suite for audit scope https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-tempest-plugin/+/995799 | 10:55 |
| dviroel | folks, watcher meeting will start in 4 minutes o/ | 12:56 |
| * dviroel will not have time for another coffee before it starts.. | 12:58 | |
| dviroel | #startmeeting watcher | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Thu Oct 8 13:00:43 2026 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dviroel. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 13:00 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'watcher' | 13:00 |
| dviroel | hi all o/ | 13:00 |
| jgilaber | o/ | 13:01 |
| amoralej | o/ | 13:01 |
| morenod | o/ | 13:01 |
| chandankumar | o/ | 13:01 |
| dviroel | courtesy ping: sean-k-mooney rlandy | 13:01 |
| dviroel | ok ,let's start with today's meeting agenda | 13:02 |
| dviroel | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-watcher-irc-meeting#L29 (Meeting agenda) | 13:02 |
| dviroel | as usual, feel free to add your own topics to the agenda | 13:02 |
| dviroel | there isn't too much for today it seems | 13:02 |
| dviroel | #topic PTG is next week | 13:02 |
| dviroel | ptg is next week \o/ | 13:03 |
| dviroel | thre is a schedule proposal here | 13:03 |
| dviroel | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/watcher-2027.1-ptg | 13:03 |
| dviroel | in these 2 days of meetings that we originally booked | 13:03 |
| dviroel | note that | 13:04 |
| rlandy | o/ | 13:04 |
| dviroel | there are other interesting topics being discussed in different project's rooms | 13:04 |
| dviroel | i added 2 topics that might be interesting for watcher audience | 13:05 |
| dviroel | and we can, next week as our starting topic, decide if we want to break during them or not | 13:05 |
| dviroel | it will depend on the expected audience there | 13:05 |
| dviroel | note that these other topics may also change dates/time, so we will really be able to check that next week | 13:06 |
| sean-k-mooney | o/ | 13:07 |
| dviroel | let me know if you need to change your topic due to a conflict | 13:07 |
| dviroel | after that, we will start our ptg with a quick retro, which you may want to start populating before Wed. | 13:07 |
| dviroel | and due to the ptg | 13:08 |
| dviroel | we will need to cancel our next week meeting | 13:08 |
| dviroel | so I will just send an email to ML after we close this one | 13:08 |
| sean-k-mooney | +1 | 13:09 |
| dviroel | any other question or comment wrt to PTG? | 13:09 |
| dviroel | note that, if you are not yet registered | 13:09 |
| dviroel | you can still register here | 13:09 |
| dviroel | #link https://openinfra.org/ptg/ | 13:09 |
| dviroel | ok, so we can chat more about the scheduled topics next week | 13:11 |
| dviroel | moving to next topic | 13:11 |
| dviroel | #topic 2025.1 (epoxy) going to unmaintained | 13:11 |
| dviroel | we recently merged some fixes to 2025.1 | 13:12 |
| * dviroel forgot the link | 13:12 | |
| dviroel | #link https://releases.openstack.org/ | 13:12 |
| dviroel | we may want to propose a new release of epoxy (and any other stable release too) | 13:13 |
| dviroel | we can then decide, once is unmaintained, if we want to keep some stable jobs running (mainly watcher-tempest-plugin) | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | so unmtained is not automatic | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | its ment to be opt in | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | and we are only allowed to have 1 unmainted branch | 13:14 |
| sean-k-mooney | so with 2025.1 movign to unmainteid 2024.1 should be taged eol | 13:15 |
| sean-k-mooney | if there is no active maintance of 2025.1 or folks asking or rather steppign up to maintian unmaintained/2025.1 | 13:15 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think we shoudl eol that agressively | 13:15 |
| jgilaber | but moving the unmaintained to eol should in theory be automatic iirc | 13:15 |
| sean-k-mooney | im not sure the release team prepare patches for that | 13:16 |
| sean-k-mooney | i have manually done that in the past for watcher adn cyborg | 13:16 |
| jgilaber | I did too, but last time it was https://github.com/openstack/releases/commit/80627f531c9c1d22f77b6e4f68963ad261f4396f | 13:16 |
| amoralej | i think branch change is managed by the releases team, i think | 13:17 |
| amoralej | i mean, proposing the patch | 13:17 |
| dviroel | i only see patches proposing a more recent release, in favor of moving them to unmainained | 13:18 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/997549 | 13:18 |
| dviroel | which not even meged yet too | 13:19 |
| dviroel | so, okay moving 2024.1 to eol and 2025.1 to unmaintained, even if we had to create these patches? | 13:20 |
| sean-k-mooney | amoralej: its ment to be done by the release liason or ptl | 13:20 |
| amoralej | https://github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/watcher-operator/pull/487 | 13:20 |
| amoralej | sorry, wrong link :) | 13:21 |
| dviroel | :) | 13:21 |
| amoralej | https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22caracal-unmaintained%22 | 13:21 |
| sean-k-mooney | but yes im ok with that but i question if we shoudl really keep 2025.1 in unmainted for a protracteed period | 13:21 |
| sean-k-mooney | i woudl suggest we revisti that in milestone 1/2 | 13:22 |
| amoralej | yes, it's up to us to maintain it or not | 13:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | welll yes and no | 13:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | it is explcity not a responablity of the core team to maintian it | 13:22 |
| dviroel | someone would need to step up | 13:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | if you personally want to that is up to you | 13:22 |
| amoralej | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/963601 is the watcher one for caracal btw | 13:22 |
| sean-k-mooney | but no bug including CVEs are the responiblity of the core team on unmainted branches | 13:23 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/watcher master: Fix double-encoding of JSON error bodies in middleware https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/1008229 | 13:23 |
| jgilaber | typically we've kept the unmaintained branches until a new release where we've need to moved another branch to unmaintained | 13:23 |
| jgilaber | and that has not been a big burden I think | 13:23 |
| jgilaber | right? | 13:23 |
| sean-k-mooney | yes and no | 13:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think its activly harmful to the project to do that | 13:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | the reason we have removed them at that point is that is the policy | 13:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | we are not ment to have more then 1 unmaintend branch | 13:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | some project go beyound the limits of the policy | 13:24 |
| sean-k-mooney | but that is only reasonabel if people other then the core team step up to maintian them | 13:25 |
| sean-k-mooney | anyway i think we can move on for now | 13:26 |
| amoralej | yes, no need to decide now | 13:26 |
| amoralej | but, as part of core team, i'd say we can not commit to maintain 2025.1 | 13:26 |
| dviroel | ok, so we may discuss a bit in ptg, if time permits | 13:26 |
| dviroel | but it would be good to have a consensus on that | 13:27 |
| dviroel | so lets move on | 13:28 |
| dviroel | #Reviews | 13:28 |
| dviroel | #undo | 13:28 |
| opendevmeet | Removing item from minutes: #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/963601 | 13:28 |
| * dviroel damn | 13:28 | |
| dviroel | adding it back | 13:28 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/963601 | 13:28 |
| dviroel | #topic Reviews | 13:28 |
| dviroel | 1008229: Fix double-encoding of JSON error bodies in middleware | 13:29 |
| dviroel | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher/+/1008229 | 13:29 |
| dviroel | it is merged already | 13:29 |
| jgilaber | this patch just merged during the meeting, thanks sean-k-mooney and amoralej | 13:29 |
| jgilaber | there is a follow-up in the watcherclient | 13:29 |
| jgilaber | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-watcherclient/+/1008429 | 13:30 |
| sean-k-mooney | i was about to say i tough i saw the messge scroll past | 13:30 |
| dviroel | oh nice | 13:30 |
| sean-k-mooney | the follow up is removign the compatiblity for both versions | 13:31 |
| sean-k-mooney | im not sure if we actully want to do that | 13:31 |
| amoralej | it may be to keep compatibility | 13:31 |
| sean-k-mooney | since we ideally want the same client to be able to talks to diffent clouds | 13:31 |
| amoralej | as watcherclient may be used to access previous versions of watcher service | 13:31 |
| amoralej | yep, ^ that | 13:31 |
| jgilaber | ah ok, good point | 13:32 |
| jgilaber | then I can abandon it | 13:32 |
| jgilaber | this is something we want to backport right? | 13:32 |
| jgilaber | both the client change and the watcher one | 13:33 |
| amoralej | dunno, tbh, it's low bug and it slighthly change the api response on errors. We can if we want | 13:34 |
| dviroel | would it break previous clients? or any other integration around? | 13:35 |
| jgilaber | the client change will be safe, the watcher one needs the client fix | 13:36 |
| amoralej | if we backport the watcher one, we also need to change the client | 13:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | so technially it shoudl not break existing client but it depend on how the client use the resouce | 13:36 |
| sean-k-mooney | it woudl break them if the nivialy douple decoded | 13:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | the conte of a error message can be chagned without a microverion | 13:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | although we did change it form a sting to a dict | 13:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | soyou could argue that that shoudl have a microveriosn | 13:37 |
| sean-k-mooney | i would not be keen to backport this | 13:38 |
| amoralej | yes, i'm not saying it needs a microversion, just that we can probably can skip the backport | 13:38 |
| jgilaber | I see, the risk/benefit for the backport is not great, thanks for the discussion | 13:39 |
| dviroel | ack, i think that we kind of agree that is not needed then | 13:39 |
| dviroel | any other review to bring attention to? | 13:39 |
| jgilaber | +1, thanks! | 13:39 |
| jgilaber | not from me | 13:39 |
| dviroel | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/watcher-2027.1-status | 13:39 |
| dviroel | in general, we have our review etherpad with some of them | 13:40 |
| dviroel | we may focus on open specs, which have a session at the ptg next week | 13:40 |
| dviroel | #topic Bugs | 13:41 |
| dviroel | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/watcher/+bug/2169843 (Watcher does not need to handle xml api responses) | 13:41 |
| amoralej | I updated https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/994607 for 2027.1 btw | 13:41 |
| dviroel | nice, thanks amoralej | 13:41 |
| amoralej | if you can add it to the todo list :) | 13:41 |
| dviroel | I also working on another spec to push an update too | 13:41 |
| dviroel | jgilaber: opened that bug | 13:42 |
| jgilaber | yep, sean-k-mooney pointed out in the error parsing patch that we do not need xml parsing | 13:43 |
| jgilaber | since that should have been removed for a while | 13:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | a while being about 12 years ago | 13:43 |
| jgilaber | that's longer than I expected :) | 13:43 |
| sean-k-mooney | i started contibuting to openstack in 2013 and the xml apis were arealyd deprecated for removal | 13:44 |
| jgilaber | so I created the bug to track the removal | 13:44 |
| jgilaber | It should be easy and low priority I think, but would be good to do it | 13:44 |
| dviroel | yeah, another debt to track and propose a removal | 13:44 |
| dviroel | unlesse someone thinks that would be medium, we can set as Low yeah | 13:45 |
| dviroel | thanks for reporting jgilaber | 13:45 |
| jgilaber | no problem! | 13:45 |
| dviroel | any other bug that you folks want to discuss? | 13:46 |
| dviroel | #topic Volunteers to chair next week | 13:46 |
| dviroel | that would be the week after ptg | 13:46 |
| dviroel | the 22th | 13:46 |
| dviroel | I will be around and I can chair | 13:47 |
| dviroel | i will keep my name then | 13:47 |
| dviroel | #topic Open Discussions | 13:47 |
| dviroel | any other topic that yo folks want to cover? | 13:47 |
| sean-k-mooney | am | 13:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | i was re reviewing your pipeliening spec | 13:49 |
| sean-k-mooney | i got about half way true but i was wondering if that was going to be on the ptg adgenda or not | 13:49 |
| dviroel | a recap of the proposal and implementation? | 13:50 |
| dviroel | it wasn't planned, but we can for sure have a topic to discuss it | 13:51 |
| dviroel | we have some time on thurday | 13:52 |
| dviroel | I can add a slot for that and we can discuss about the proposed approach | 13:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | ok | 13:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | i can add my comments to the spec | 13:53 |
| dviroel | sure | 13:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | i think its ok to continue in gerrit | 13:53 |
| sean-k-mooney | i just wanted to confirm a few implciation of things that chagne form last cycle | 13:54 |
| sean-k-mooney | mostly it looked fine but htere were one of two thing i wanted to check with you | 13:54 |
| sean-k-mooney | for example i think we need a state between runing and canceleld | 13:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | which is CANCELLING | 13:55 |
| dviroel | ack, makes sense. If we have time I can do a quick review on what changed | 13:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | i.e. where we have requested it to be cancled but it has not been compelted yet | 13:55 |
| sean-k-mooney | right now the propoal (and perhaps audits) | 13:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | do cancilation by writhing the cannceled state to the db | 13:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | and then the applier notices and stop processign it right | 13:56 |
| amoralej | it'd be good to focus in what has changed since previous release | 13:56 |
| sean-k-mooney | anyway ill comemtn in the spec. | 13:57 |
| dviroel | it is something that also affects Audits today yeah | 13:57 |
| dviroel | since there is no CANCELLING | 13:57 |
| dviroel | ack, thanks sean-k-mooney | 13:57 |
| sean-k-mooney | ack so maybe that is somethign to adress sepreatly | 13:57 |
| dviroel | thanks for reviewing. | 13:58 |
| dviroel | any other topic before we close? | 13:58 |
| dviroel | al;rigth | 13:59 |
| dviroel | we will meet again next week at the ptg | 13:59 |
| dviroel | thank you all for participating | 13:59 |
| dviroel | #endmeeting | 13:59 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Thu Oct 8 13:59:44 2026 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 13:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2026/watcher.2026-10-08-13.00.html | 13:59 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2026/watcher.2026-10-08-13.00.txt | 13:59 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/watcher/2026/watcher.2026-10-08-13.00.log.html | 13:59 |
| opendevreview | Douglas Viroel proposed openstack/watcher-specs master: Add spec for migration eligibility filters feature https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/watcher-specs/+/994807 | 19:51 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 4.1.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!