14:00:04 <whoami-rajat> #startmeeting cinder
14:00:04 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Nov 16 14:00:04 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is whoami-rajat. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:04 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:04 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
14:00:06 <whoami-rajat> #topic roll call
14:00:33 <simondodsley> o/
14:00:38 <TusharTgite> hi
14:01:03 <enriquetaso> hi
14:01:52 <jungleboyj> o/
14:02:39 <rosmaita> o/
14:02:58 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-antelope-meetings
14:03:00 <mubeen> hi
14:03:42 <hemna> yough
14:04:57 <whoami-rajat> reasonable attendance, let's get started
14:05:03 <whoami-rajat> #topic announcements
14:05:12 <whoami-rajat> first, Cinder festival of XS reviews this friday
14:05:19 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-festival-of-reviews
14:05:34 <whoami-rajat> last time it was in PTG week and we didn't get enough time to do it
14:05:53 <whoami-rajat> but since this week is the third friday of the month, we will have festival of XS reviews
14:06:24 <whoami-rajat> I will send a mail later today or tomorrow for a reminder
14:06:30 <whoami-rajat> next, Add topics for midcycle
14:06:39 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-antelope-midcycles
14:06:56 <whoami-rajat> we are going to have midcycle 1 on 30th Nov which is next to next week
14:07:07 <whoami-rajat> so it's close, so please add your topics to the etherpad ^
14:07:34 <whoami-rajat> next, Migrating devstack jobs to Jammy (Ubuntu LTS 22.04)
14:07:42 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-November/031205.html
14:07:51 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/migrate-to-jammy
14:08:42 <whoami-rajat> gmann, is planning to merge the migration patches on 18th November, not sure how we will be able to merge the tempest patch given the ceph job failure
14:08:51 <whoami-rajat> we've 2 patches proposed, one for cinder and one for os-brick
14:09:16 <whoami-rajat> the cinder change is failing with the same reason tempest is failing, some issue in the ceph job for packages
14:09:39 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/861609
14:09:47 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/862183
14:10:03 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, proposed the os-brick patch which is failing on py39 for some test which looks random
14:10:07 <whoami-rajat> probably os-brick is fine
14:10:20 <whoami-rajat> we've a non-voting ceph job which is failing
14:10:35 <whoami-rajat> os-brick-src-devstack-plugin-ceph-nv
14:11:15 <rosmaita> i'll go back and look at the os-brick patch later after the new logs are available
14:11:46 <whoami-rajat> cool
14:11:51 <whoami-rajat> i see they've a patch up for ceph issue
14:11:53 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph/+/863524
14:12:01 <enriquetaso> Just to add a comment: devstack + ceph + Jammy don't work either (as fas as I could tell)
14:12:04 <rosmaita> i figure the ceph job will start working once that merges
14:12:31 <enriquetaso> manually *, well.. i guess it's the same
14:13:44 <whoami-rajat> so we look good there, let's wait for gate results
14:14:25 <whoami-rajat> moving on, next, Call for presentations for 2023 OpenInfra summit is open
14:14:55 <whoami-rajat> CFP is open for 2023 vancouver summit
14:15:04 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-November/031201.html
14:15:26 <whoami-rajat> if anyone is interested in presenting their topics, please submit your presentations
14:16:08 <whoami-rajat> next, Upcoming releases
14:16:14 <whoami-rajat> 1) cinderclient for M-1
14:16:21 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/864531
14:16:36 <whoami-rajat> we've rosmaita's patch that fixes snapshot create operation
14:16:47 <whoami-rajat> so looks like we should release
14:17:03 <whoami-rajat> jbernard, and I can take a look
14:17:21 <jbernard> whoami-rajat: roger that
14:17:34 <whoami-rajat> thanks
14:17:36 <rosmaita> i already forgot about that patch, but it makes sense to release
14:18:12 <whoami-rajat> :D
14:18:14 <whoami-rajat> 2) Cinderlib Zed (16 Dec)
14:18:21 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/864504
14:18:35 <whoami-rajat> this is tricky since our gate is broken for the whole cycle
14:19:10 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, i forgot what we discussed last week about it ...
14:19:12 <rosmaita> i sort of volunteered to look at that, but haven't done it yet
14:19:25 <whoami-rajat> oh ok, great
14:19:36 <rosmaita> the plan was if it's an easy fix i'll do it, otherwise we will bug geguileo :)
14:19:41 <whoami-rajat> geguileo, wasn't around last week so just for awareness ^
14:20:04 <whoami-rajat> sounds good
14:20:47 <whoami-rajat> 3) cinder tempest plugin: ussuri and victoria last
14:20:54 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/864343
14:21:08 <whoami-rajat> not sure why they've tagged it -last, maybe it's a tempest plugin convention
14:21:19 <whoami-rajat> but looks like they're moving these branches to EM
14:21:58 <whoami-rajat> will review that
14:22:09 <whoami-rajat> last announcement, Bug Deputy and Stable release manager
14:22:09 <rosmaita> i think the -last thing is to make it easy to automate finding the tag
14:22:22 <whoami-rajat> ah ok
14:22:28 <whoami-rajat> thanks
14:23:07 <whoami-rajat> starting with bug deputy, no one reached out to me throughout the week so if enriquetaso doesn't have any issues, she can continue doing the great work!
14:23:45 <enriquetaso> I have not issues with this, anyway if someone would like to take the role i'm open as well
14:23:56 <rosmaita> enriquetaso FTW!!!
14:24:13 <whoami-rajat> enriquetaso++
14:24:18 <enriquetaso> \o/
14:24:38 <whoami-rajat> great
14:24:40 <whoami-rajat> now regarding release liaison
14:25:02 <jungleboyj> enriquetaso:  Thank you!
14:25:03 <whoami-rajat> jbernard, has been doing great work, he managed to get all stable branches released and also worked on getting wallaby to EM
14:25:25 <enriquetaso> jbernard++
14:25:42 <whoami-rajat> so i will leave it upto jbernard if he would like to continue the work as release liaison for this cycle as well
14:25:56 <rosmaita> jbernard++
14:26:17 <jbernard> i do, i think i finally understand all the pieces now, going forward should be much easier
14:26:32 <whoami-rajat> great
14:26:51 <whoami-rajat> thanks enriquetaso and jbernard for the great work!!
14:27:33 <whoami-rajat> moving on to topics now
14:27:56 <whoami-rajat> #topic Discrepancy in volume create arguments "name" and "size"
14:28:09 <whoami-rajat> please see last 3-4 comments here
14:28:11 <whoami-rajat> #link  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/857670
14:28:31 <whoami-rajat> currently in OSC, name is a positional argument and size (--size) is an optional one
14:28:58 <whoami-rajat> Stephen changed the OSC behavior to make name accept 0 or more arguments but it's still positional arg
14:29:19 <whoami-rajat> the --size argument is mandatory to pass if we don't specify create from snapshot or volume
14:29:27 <whoami-rajat> so functionality wise it works fine
14:29:51 <whoami-rajat> my ask was to modify the size as a positional argument since it's needed when we are creating a normal volume (not from any source)
14:30:05 <whoami-rajat> and make name as optional one (--name) since name is never mandatory
14:30:25 <whoami-rajat> maybe I'm stretching it but the design doesn't look convincing to me on the OSC side
14:30:32 <rosmaita> i guess your worry is that people moving from cinderclient -> osc will wind up with a bunch of volumes named "1024"
14:30:32 <whoami-rajat> wanted to know what the team thinks about it
14:31:04 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, that's a possibility
14:31:43 <whoami-rajat> the transition from cinderclient -> OSC should be seamless, at least for the main commands like volume create
14:32:05 <rosmaita> one would hope so!
14:32:48 <whoami-rajat> I've a local patch which does change this behavior but no point working on it any further if it just seems an issue only to me
14:32:53 <rosmaita> well, fwiw, i support you on this
14:33:26 <rosmaita> it would help if the osc team were a little more attentive to our CLI to ease the transition
14:33:41 <eharney> your idea makes sense to me
14:34:19 <enriquetaso> I think we discussed this many time ago and I think name shouldn't be mandatory but I need to review that patch because I haven't
14:34:31 <whoami-rajat> thanks, I will complete and push that patch then
14:34:44 <whoami-rajat> enriquetaso, name isn
14:34:48 <whoami-rajat> sorry
14:35:19 <enriquetaso> sorry, i'll check the patch first whoami-rajat
14:35:21 <rosmaita> enriquetaso: it was, but stephen listened to us and made it optional recently
14:35:39 <rosmaita> so this is a slightly different issue
14:36:01 <whoami-rajat> enriquetaso, name isn't mandatory but positional so you can say "openstack volume create 1234 --size 1" but it's opposite to our structure in cinderclient
14:36:49 <whoami-rajat> that's all i had for this, let's move to next topic
14:36:56 <whoami-rajat> #topic Outreachy Update
14:36:58 <enriquetaso> do we have any cinder member also part of the osc core (in order to vote i mean)? I don't know how much I agree with the fact that the owner also approves the patch, but I think that discussion is for another time.
14:37:25 <enriquetaso> i think the osc is a small group
14:37:28 <enriquetaso> that's me
14:37:39 <enriquetaso> Sad news: Cinder only had one potential contribution this round. The applicant has chosen another project to work on so we don't have another applicant to pick as an intern.
14:37:42 <whoami-rajat> yeah, we discussed it before, let's reiterate this discussion during midcycle
14:37:52 <enriquetaso> We are out of this Outreachy round :(
14:38:16 <whoami-rajat> yeah and that's really bad, she was a promising candidate
14:38:28 <enriquetaso> yes, she was really good
14:38:52 <enriquetaso> i think one of the best I can remember, really big first contribution
14:39:26 <rosmaita> enriquetaso: thanks for trying!
14:39:31 <enriquetaso> guess, we have to continue with the functional test ourself. I'll work on that
14:39:32 <whoami-rajat> yep, so we won't be having outreachy session during this quarter right?
14:39:40 <enriquetaso> nop
14:39:46 <jungleboyj> rosmaita:  ++
14:40:15 <whoami-rajat> ack, thanks for guiding me through the outreachy process enriquetaso
14:40:45 <enriquetaso> applicants really struggle to deploy devstack and make something work. most drop out at that time
14:41:00 <enriquetaso> whoami-rajat, maybe we can try again next year
14:41:30 <whoami-rajat> sure
14:41:36 <enriquetaso> that's all for me
14:41:55 <whoami-rajat> thanks again
14:42:12 <whoami-rajat> that's all the topics we had for today, moving to open discussion
14:42:16 <whoami-rajat> #topic open discussion
14:42:27 <inori> Execuse me, I'd like to bring attention in this patch here. I made a request in the reply to the comment, and I want to know whether it is feasible.
14:42:37 <inori> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/847730
14:43:00 <inori> Since the difference between current community and our lateset version is large, and I'd like to submit and merge them as soon as possible, so could you please review and comment the patches at your earliest convenience?
14:43:35 <whoami-rajat> i see hemna has a -1 there
14:44:21 <rosmaita> inori: are you saying that what you want to do is submit a series of patches, and after that, bump the version?  because otherwise the "community" and "enterprise" drivers will have different versions?
14:44:37 <rosmaita> (saying in your response to walt on the patch, i mean)
14:44:42 <ganso> (o/ for later open-discussion quick topic)
14:44:52 <inori> Yes, he said that we should add versioning information. But the current community code is old, which is quite different from our latest version
14:45:58 <rosmaita> ok, and you want to add the features to the community driver in a different order than the "enterprise" version numbers
14:46:32 <inori> Yes, does it is feasible?
14:46:44 <whoami-rajat> i see another change for qos support: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/703770
14:48:17 <rosmaita> inori: the current community driver is 1.3.0 .... what will the version be after you make all the changes?
14:48:32 <inori> 703770‘s time is a little long, so I submitted  847730 again
14:49:03 <inori> it will be 1.7
14:49:46 <whoami-rajat> inori, it is always good to continue in the same patch to preserve history but if you plan to move forward with 847730, would be good to abandon 703770 to avoid confusion
14:50:01 <rosmaita> well, how about doing 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, etc, and then bump them both to 2.0 when you have reached functional equivalence?
14:50:56 <inori> I see. I'll try to abandon 703770 later.
14:52:15 <inori> but some function has been changed over and over again in the history versions.
14:52:19 <rosmaita> in any case, i agree with hemna that we want some kind of version history in the file about the features that are being added
14:54:13 <inori> In other words, the question I made in 847730 may not be very feasible?
14:55:38 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, and hemna seems to disagree with the approach so probably you will need to change it
14:56:08 <rosmaita> inori: let me try to say this another way
14:56:20 <rosmaita> you already have 2 different drivers
14:57:10 <rosmaita> so the version history is going to be different
14:57:37 <rosmaita> i mean, is the plan that you will get all the code from the "enterprise" driver merged upstream, and then you will only have one driver?
14:58:58 <inori> We have FC and iSCSI driver, and the version of them are synchronized.
14:59:59 <inori> The community is 1.3.0, and now our latest is 1.7, and many changes have taken place in the process.
15:00:00 <rosmaita> well, that's ok, it looks like you keep the version number in the common file
15:01:12 <inori> so it may be a little difficult to submit them in the order of versions.
15:01:16 <rosmaita> yeah, but inori, we are interested in knowing what version of the upstream driver is being used ... i don't think we can wait until everything has merged, because all committed changes will be released when Antelope is released
15:02:08 <rosmaita> inori: you don't have to submit them in the order of versions ... you are just submitting a series of patches.  Just bump the openstack driver from 1.3.0 to 1.3.0.1, and then to 1.3.0.2, etc
15:02:24 <rosmaita> and when you reach equivalence, you can bump it to whatever you want
15:02:41 <whoami-rajat> and we're out of time, would be good to continue the discussion in cinder channel (after the BS meeting) or on the patch
15:02:49 <whoami-rajat> thanks everyone for joining
15:02:54 <whoami-rajat> #endmeeting