14:00:05 <whoami-rajat> #startmeeting cinder
14:00:05 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Feb  1 14:00:05 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is whoami-rajat. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:05 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:00:05 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'cinder'
14:00:07 <whoami-rajat> #topic roll call
14:00:35 <eharney> hi
14:00:37 <geguileo> hi! o/
14:00:40 <jbernard> o/
14:00:44 <keerthivasansuresh> o/
14:00:48 <simondodsley> o/
14:00:48 <Tony_Saad> Hello
14:00:53 <Tony_Saad> o/
14:00:59 <Rahman-LB> Hi
14:01:30 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/cinder-antelope-meetings
14:01:55 <rosmaita> o/
14:01:56 <nahimsouza[m]> o/
14:03:26 <felipe_rodrigues> o/
14:03:39 <whoami-rajat> hello
14:03:44 <jungleboyj> o/
14:03:44 <tosky> o/o/
14:04:11 <whoami-rajat> good amount of people are around, let's get started
14:04:22 <whoami-rajat> #topic announcements
14:04:31 <whoami-rajat> first, Combined PTL+TC elections
14:04:39 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031960.html
14:05:03 <whoami-rajat> it's that time of cycle where we're closing on on Antelope and preparing for Bobcat
14:05:13 <whoami-rajat> and part of the planning is that elections will start soon
14:05:29 <whoami-rajat> the current mail only says about nomination for PTL and TC and also the elections will be combined
14:05:55 <whoami-rajat> related to this, active contributors who do not have a commit won't be allowed to vote
14:06:36 <whoami-rajat> even though you're active on IRC or ML, it won't be counted as contribution in the voting, so I would advise to have some contribution in terms of commit
14:06:43 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031919.html
14:07:21 <whoami-rajat> and also Nominations begin Feb 01, 2023 23:45 UTC
14:07:42 <whoami-rajat> next, python-cinderclient yoga gate is broken
14:08:00 <whoami-rajat> I've been looking at this for past 1-2 weeks and i THINK I've some idea about what is happening
14:08:13 <whoami-rajat> I wrote a mail to the requirements team regarding the fix (according to me)
14:08:20 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031947.html
14:08:48 <whoami-rajat> I've sent another mail describing what seems to be the issue
14:08:49 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031958.html
14:09:10 <whoami-rajat> there could be other possibilities to fix this but currently I think we need a requirements bump in u-c in the yoga branch
14:09:13 <eharney> that looks like an incompatibility between rtslib and the system/kernel
14:09:42 <whoami-rajat> yes, i came to the same conclusion
14:10:38 <whoami-rajat> so let's wait for the requirements team to comment on it but until then yoga gate is broken for python-cinderclient
14:10:39 <eharney> so another option might be to pin the yoga gate to older nodes if bumping the reqs doesn't pan out
14:11:36 <whoami-rajat> that seems reasonable as well, just we don't bump into other dependency issues
14:12:53 <whoami-rajat> ok final announcement, Supporting SQLAlchemy 2.0 in OpenStack
14:13:03 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-February/031980.html
14:13:18 <whoami-rajat> this came out minutes ago but i thought it's important to mention
14:13:35 <rosmaita> "Has a lot of things changed?" YES!!!
14:13:48 <whoami-rajat> we've already done a lot of work for making cinder compatible with sqlalchemy 2.0
14:14:03 <whoami-rajat> :D
14:14:23 <whoami-rajat> currently we've a requirements patch bumping the version of sqlalchemy and cinder job is failing there
14:14:31 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/872065
14:14:55 <whoami-rajat> I haven't looked but hopefully it won't be too much work (since we've already done a lot)
14:15:06 <whoami-rajat> might be a matter of replacing removed libraries with their alternatives
14:15:17 <whoami-rajat> but yeah we need to be ready for it next cycle
14:16:37 <whoami-rajat> that's all i had for announcements today
14:16:44 <eharney> we need to finish reviewing the db re-work patches currently in flight
14:17:31 <whoami-rajat> ah, i lost track of them
14:19:26 <whoami-rajat> ok there is one more announcement which i forgot about
14:19:37 <whoami-rajat> os-brick release next week
14:19:45 <whoami-rajat> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/os-brick+branch:master+status:open
14:20:28 <whoami-rajat> this is a list of open patches in os-brick, i haven't taken a careful look to see which all are important but if you've any patches that need to be part of release
14:20:30 <whoami-rajat> do let me know
14:20:36 <eharney> there's at least one requirements change in there
14:21:17 <whoami-rajat> this one? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/871260
14:21:26 <eharney> yes
14:22:22 <whoami-rajat> ok, I've created an etherpad so people can link their patches after the meeting as well
14:22:24 <whoami-rajat> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/os-brick-antelope-patches
14:22:57 <simondodsley> we should try and clean up all the old patches with merge conflicts
14:23:18 <simondodsley> ie abandon them??
14:24:05 <whoami-rajat> some looks kind of important, maybe good to leave a comment asking if they're actively working on it
14:24:17 <eharney> probably not abandon them, we should assess them and just rebase some of them
14:24:57 <eharney> some are refactors that have been sitting for ~2 years that we need to chase down
14:26:00 <whoami-rajat> maybe they didn't get reviews initially and the author forgot about them
14:26:16 <whoami-rajat> I can create a comment template asking them to revive it
14:26:35 <whoami-rajat> else we can follow Eric's suggestion to rebase them ourself
14:26:53 <whoami-rajat> (given they're important enough changes)
14:28:14 <whoami-rajat> this can be followed up, we also have topics so let's move to them now
14:28:25 <whoami-rajat> #topic PyPi additional external maintainers audit & cleanup
14:28:27 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, that's you
14:28:41 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031848.html
14:29:45 <rosmaita> ok, the email explains the issue
14:30:14 <rosmaita> the problem is that having extra maintainers in pypi means that someone can do a release
14:30:41 <rosmaita> which happened with xstatic-font-awesome, and i have no idea where the source code is for what was released
14:30:49 <rosmaita> anyway, there's some cleanup proposed
14:31:15 <whoami-rajat> pretty bad that i missed that email, looks like I've some work to do
14:31:46 <rosmaita> well, the only work really is to discuss with the external maintainers whether they object to openstack-ci becoming the sole maintainer
14:32:04 <rosmaita> i suspect most of them will not
14:32:36 <rosmaita> but if they object, the current TC proposal is that we just hand the repo back to them and let them maintain it
14:33:00 <rosmaita> and if there are arguments later, we fork it and do it ourselves
14:33:37 <rosmaita> but it's possible that there are additional solutions that can be proposed at the bobcat vPTG
14:34:00 <rosmaita> the key thing is that we don't want the xstatic-font-awesome situation to arise again
14:35:20 <rosmaita> anyway, i think we (or actually Rajat) can send an email to sean, Ivan, and thingee ... i think they will have no objection, they haven't been involved in those projects recently
14:35:33 <rosmaita> i think they are holdovers from the initial creation
14:35:57 <rosmaita> for cinderlib and rbd-iscsi-client, they are more active, and may have a stronger opinion
14:36:33 <rosmaita> that's all from me
14:37:00 <rosmaita> just wanted to bring it up at a meeting, because as you can see in the email thread
14:37:16 <rosmaita> some people have strong opinions about opensource "ownership"
14:37:33 <rosmaita> and feel that kicking out external maintainers is not good
14:38:02 <rosmaita> ok, that's really all from me
14:38:12 <whoami-rajat> sure I will send an email to all external owners, I've updated the cinder situation here https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/openstack-pypi-maintainers-cleanup#L36
14:38:35 <rosmaita> great!
14:38:39 <whoami-rajat> hopefully that's all the projects we have
14:38:46 <whoami-rajat> (releasable)
14:39:44 <rosmaita> yes, i think that list is accurate
14:40:36 <whoami-rajat> cool, thanks for checking
14:41:50 <whoami-rajat> ok, I've an action item for this one
14:42:03 <whoami-rajat> thanks rosmaita for bringing this up
14:42:16 <whoami-rajat> let's move to next topic
14:42:34 <whoami-rajat> #topic EOL pre train branches i.e. rocky, stein
14:42:41 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031922.html
14:42:58 <whoami-rajat> so rosmaita and I were discussing this in the cinder channel and later that day the release team sent out an email regarding this
14:43:11 <rosmaita> we are trend-setters
14:43:40 <whoami-rajat> i agree!
14:43:54 <whoami-rajat> so I've replied to that email with the current situation in rocky and stein branches
14:43:56 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-January/031943.html
14:44:22 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, noticed that our nova-multiattach job is broken because it was defined in nova and removed in the nova rocky release
14:44:39 <whoami-rajat> when nova transitioned rocky to EOL, that job started failing
14:44:54 <whoami-rajat> so we've a broken job in our rocky repo
14:45:07 <whoami-rajat> the last commits to rocky and stein were made in September 2021
14:45:31 <whoami-rajat> clearly these branches aren't very active
14:46:05 <whoami-rajat> I wanted to bring this up to the meeting to see if anyone has any concerns if we EOL rocky and stein branches
14:46:21 <eharney> seems reasonable to me
14:47:00 <rosmaita> yeah, if they are deleted from nova, i feel like they are effectively deleted from openstack
14:47:12 <whoami-rajat> also nova did it earlier this cycle so not a lot of people using cinder EM branches without nova
14:47:24 <whoami-rajat> #link https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-October/030980.html
14:49:01 <whoami-rajat> ok, i don't see any concerns so i will reply to that thread giving it a +1 from cinder side
14:49:26 <whoami-rajat> that's all from my side for this topic
14:50:02 <whoami-rajat> we've time left so let's move to open discussion
14:50:03 <rosmaita> i guess the only question is there any final stuff to get in there ... if not, we don't need to fix the gate
14:50:11 <rosmaita> https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cinder+branch:stable/rocky+status:open
14:50:31 <rosmaita> https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/cinder+branch:stable/stein+status:open
14:50:35 <whoami-rajat> good question
14:50:54 <whoami-rajat> i see the VMDK security patch in there
14:51:20 <rosmaita> well, not proposed by me
14:51:45 <rosmaita> and i think it's missing the use-json-from-qemu-img backport that's needed
14:52:41 <rosmaita> actually, while we are all here, i should make sure the team supports what i said on the CVE bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1996188/comments/173
14:52:48 <whoami-rajat> yeah we need that one first ...
14:53:15 <Tony_Saad> Hey guys, first time at a weekly meeting. Sorry for interrupting. When is an appropriate time for me to bring things to the table. Is there a time in the meeting for everyone to jump in ?
14:54:05 <rosmaita> what i said was that as far as the -em branches go (to which we are not obligated to do backports), we went as far as train to cover a release that supports python 2.7, but would not go farther
14:54:33 <rosmaita> that way anyone interested has an example to backport farther if they want to
14:54:45 <rosmaita> so i think we have gone above and beyond on this one
14:55:06 <rosmaita> (i just wish we had deleted rocky and stein back in november when nova did!)
14:55:34 <rosmaita> Tony_Saad: this is the "open discussion" part of the meeting, so you can jump in
14:55:52 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, we've open discussion but it's after all topics are discussed
14:55:59 <whoami-rajat> let me open it
14:56:03 <whoami-rajat> #topic open discussion
14:56:10 <Tony_Saad> There we go!!
14:57:30 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, yeah, I really don't want to review/maintain/fix anything beyond train but we currently have them in EM so not sure what will be the right thing here
14:57:46 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, you can go ahead, we only have 3 minutes left
14:58:28 <Tony_Saad> This is a message from Jean-Perrie from Dell "I have published a new blueprint/spec concerning our 8GB rounding issue and ask them when we want to introduce a new option which is not
14:58:29 <Tony_Saad> due to a bug if we still need to open a launchpad or a blueprint is enough"
14:58:52 <Tony_Saad> I copied and pasted the message to save on time
14:59:09 <rosmaita> whoami-rajat: about EM expectations ... see fungi's comment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1996188/comments/172
14:59:24 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, we open blueprints on launchpad
14:59:39 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, the process is to register a blueprint on launchpad and write a spec pointing to that blueprint
15:00:37 <Tony_Saad> blueprint will be enough then
15:00:50 <whoami-rajat> rosmaita, ok, that aligns with our thoughts
15:00:52 <rosmaita> whoami-rajat: also, from the release docs: "Without regular comprehensive maintenance, it is quite possible that someone proposing a backport to an EM branch will find that tests have broken since the last successful merge. This means that tests (or test configuration) might need to be fixed, reduced, or reconfigured before the backport itself can be evaluated and merged. The onus for that falls on the backporter or the gr
15:00:53 <rosmaita> oup of people looking after a specific release."
15:01:01 <rosmaita> https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#extended-maintenance
15:01:49 <whoami-rajat> ok, so we don't have to do anything in this, that solves everything :D
15:01:56 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, yes a launchpad blueprint and a spec is enough
15:02:02 <Tony_Saad> Also we have a bunch of Dell patches for review including powerstore volume caching https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cinder/+/867753
15:02:35 <whoami-rajat> Tony_Saad, add it to the review request section and i will try to address it
15:02:39 <whoami-rajat> we're out of time
15:02:42 <whoami-rajat> thanks everyone for attending
15:02:44 <whoami-rajat> #endmeeting