16:02:23 <priteau> #startmeeting blazar
16:02:24 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr  9 16:02:23 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is priteau. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:02:25 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:02:28 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'blazar'
16:02:39 <priteau> #topic Roll call
16:02:54 <jakecoll> jakecoll here
16:03:10 <priteau> Hi jakecoll
16:04:33 <priteau> #topic Ussuri release
16:06:00 <priteau> jakecoll: I spent more time recently testing the network reservation patch. Unfortunately I found many bugs, not yet flagged on Gerrit. It needs a lot more work before being merged.
16:06:17 <jakecoll> What were the issue you saw?
16:07:26 <priteau> Well, it doesn't work at all, for various reasons
16:07:45 <priteau> Some segment_id -> segmentation_id renames still missing
16:08:06 <priteau> Soft delete code present without the required support in DB layer
16:08:28 <priteau> Authentication with Keystone on DevStack doesn't work because the URL is constructed differently
16:08:33 <jakecoll> I don't see any segment_id when I search my repo
16:09:16 <priteau> VXLAN IDs > 4094 rejected
16:09:30 <jakecoll> oh wait
16:09:47 <jakecoll> some code didn't get added to my last push. Christ.
16:10:02 <jakecoll> I see it in the diff. Just pushed patch.
16:11:14 <diurnalist> hello, sorry to be running a bit late
16:11:51 <jakecoll> Which URL for devstack-keystone auth?
16:12:50 <priteau> jakecoll: You can see how the existing neutron client is constructed here: https://opendev.org/openstack/blazar/src/branch/master/blazar/utils/openstack/neutron.py#L59-L63
16:13:23 <priteau> I have a work-in-progress patch to fix most these issues. I managed to create a network, but not yet to delete it.
16:14:08 <priteau> Given how many issues are not caught by unit tests, we really need integration tests (Tempest) for this feature
16:14:42 <priteau> I would prefer to ship solid code in Victoria than broken code in Ussuri
16:18:04 <priteau> And the Ussuri client is getting released now, so the feature would only be half-complete anyway
16:21:27 <priteau> What do you think?
16:22:39 <jakecoll> We'd really prefer to get this out
16:22:55 <jakecoll> When is the deadline on the client?
16:24:51 <priteau> The final release for client libraries is today. There were no patches pending approval so I've already approved it.
16:25:17 <jakecoll> alright
16:27:40 <jakecoll> This experience makes me think plugins need to be compartmentalized.
16:27:50 <priteau> The only scenario where I can see the service-side code ship in Ussuri is if we have a fully tested patch + tempest scenario in the next few days, so we could have time to review by Ussuri RC1
16:28:23 <jakecoll> diurnalist: what do you think?
16:31:45 <priteau> My preference would still be to take a bit more time to make this solid and ship it in Victoria. If it merges early in the Victoria cycle it would be a clean backport to Ussuri for your fork anyway.
16:32:14 <jakecoll> That depends more on Jason and Kate
16:32:25 <jakecoll> My guess is that probably won't happen
16:33:49 <diurnalist> neither of us have implemented a tempest test before so there will be overhead learning how that works
16:34:13 <diurnalist> I agree that a tempest test would make things feel more solid, is it possible we could get help with that?
16:35:22 <priteau> You can find existing scenarios at https://opendev.org/openstack/blazar-tempest-plugin/src/branch/master/blazar_tempest_plugin/tests/scenario
16:36:12 <diurnalist> how does one test a tempest test? do you just make zuul do it?
16:39:17 <priteau> If you want to run it locally you would need to set up tempest with a custom version of blazar-tempest-plugin. An alternative is to just push the new scenario to the blazar-tempest-plugin repo and let Zuul test it, but for a new feature this might lead to many iterations (each one taking 1+ hour)
16:39:31 <diurnalist> :((
16:40:29 <priteau> I'll try to dig up instructions to run blazar tempest scenarios manually, I haven't done so in a long time
16:40:47 <diurnalist> long story short, it sounds like this isn't going to make ussuri if these are the new conditions for its inclusion
16:42:35 <diurnalist> i think we'll need jake's time on other projects starting next week
16:43:51 <diurnalist> if i get some free time i might look in to tempest for the feature myself, but it's unrealistic to expect it in the coming days
16:47:43 <priteau> I've mentioned that we should have a tempest scenario in the last meeting, but it's really after manually testing the change that I realised it isn't yet in a state to be merged.
16:48:29 <priteau> The tempest scenario is really a tool to verify that the code is working. Unfortunately it seems unit tests are not enough for this.
16:49:36 <diurnalist> i understand, i'm just saying we can't deliver it in the near future, so this is not going to make ussuri in that case
16:50:43 <priteau> Understood. That's unfortunate, but it's the right decision to make. There is no point in shipping broken code.
16:52:38 <priteau> Almost out of time. Anything else to discuss?
16:54:02 <diurnalist> to anticipate future issues: is there guidance on what will require tempest tests?
16:55:27 <priteau> In general any major feature, but it's more up to the experience with the code. For example for floating IP reservation I did extensive manual testing so I was confident it was working well.
16:55:44 <priteau> (it is still a TODO item to add a scenario test for floating IP though)
16:58:08 <diurnalist> yes, i was noticing there was not one for floating IPs
16:58:40 <diurnalist> i'll think about what we might need to bring for usage enforcement
16:59:36 <priteau> Generally I would also recommend testing major patches on devstack. It's clear in this case that some Chameleon bits stayed included by mistake.
17:02:28 <priteau> And you can run tempest inside it of course
17:02:48 <priteau> We're out of time, I'll be in touch if I can find some tempest pointers for you
17:03:06 <priteau> Have a good Easter!
17:03:10 <priteau> #endmeeting