14:00:08 #startmeeting cloudkitty 14:00:08 Meeting started Mon Jan 24 14:00:08 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is rafaelweingartner. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:08 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:08 The meeting name has been set to 'cloudkitty' 14:00:13 Roll count 14:00:51 I am online but also in another meeting 14:02:25 Ok, no worries 14:04:12 #topic Target review of meeting 14:04:25 We have the following patches as target for this meeting. 14:04:28 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/799207 14:04:30 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/684734 14:04:33 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/775359 14:05:03 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-tempest-plugin/+/685344 14:05:13 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/824745 14:05:30 Starting with: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/799207 14:05:37 o/ 14:06:09 have you guys been able to review and test it after the changes required by the patch applied in the Spec before merging it? 14:06:23 I mean, we changed some details in the spec that needed amendments in the patch 14:09:03 I'm almost done with testing 799207 and only need a few days to confirm the POST method works as expected. 14:09:35 Which specs do you mean? 14:11:46 I mean the spec that describe/document this new feature 14:11:53 we changed the APi to be called reprocesses 14:11:58 that is why you faced those issues 14:12:03 Now, everything should be fine 14:13:46 Yes, I confirm GET /v2/task/reprocesses works fine in my test environment. 14:13:50 I guess we can wait until you finish your review process Marius 14:14:17 and, this should give us some more time, for other people to test it as well, if they wish 14:15:00 We still need one more pair of eyes and I'm almost done with my tests so yeah, we have to wait. 14:15:14 ok 14:17:35 So, moving on: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/684734 14:17:47 Have you had the opportunity to review it? 14:19:08 I haven't checked this one yet. 14:19:14 Will add myself to CC now. 14:19:39 Ok 14:20:07 This could be the next change I test after I'm done with 799207. 14:21:55 Ok 14:22:03 I have reviewed it, and it looks fine 14:22:11 but I will add it to our next meeting then 14:23:15 Sure. 14:23:45 Moving on: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/775359 14:23:59 I had reviewed it, and the author did not respond 14:24:21 Pierre said that we would try to reach the author, but I guess that we have not heard anything back 14:24:29 What do you think Mariusz? 14:25:19 I guess that I can try to reach the author as well 14:25:49 Well, we have the option to abandon the patch which would be a shame... 14:26:48 exactly 14:26:58 I do not like to abandon other people patch 14:27:00 but since no one wants to work on it maybe we should so this. 14:27:20 We could also take it over... 14:27:29 I mean, I could amend it and apply the changes I suggested 14:27:54 I did not do it, because I thought that it would sound a bit rude to apply changes direclty on top of other people's patches 14:28:53 I'd say you should apply your changes. 14:29:14 Or we abandon this patch and you create a new one. 14:29:15 Ok 14:29:21 I will take some note here then 14:29:26 (which is even more rude :D) 14:29:50 :) 14:29:59 Is there a Story describing what this patch is trying to acomplish? 14:30:18 no 14:30:25 not that I am aware of 14:30:25 (I remember we had discussion about the issue but keep forgetting about it) 14:30:40 rafaelweingartner: I think it's fine to take over the patch. Add yourself as Co-Authored-By 14:30:46 ah, yes, there is 14:30:48 https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2006672 14:31:25 Ah, I should have read the commit message. ;) 14:31:30 Thanks, Rafael. 14:33:01 Yeah, this feels like easy (and almost ready) fix so let's finish it up. 14:33:47 I'll be happy to review/test the next patch. 14:33:52 Agreed 14:35:42 Moving on: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty-tempest-plugin/+/685344 14:35:55 This patch is stuck there 14:36:09 We have worked quite a lot to get CloudKitty stable and with new features 14:36:26 but I guess that it is time to add integration tests for V2 API, to provide a more solid CI pipeline 14:36:43 I guess that for next release, we could dedicate some time and energy to this patch 14:36:47 what do you guys think? 14:39:45 I wanted to look into CloudKitty testing with Tempest for some time now so would be interested in helping with these. 14:40:23 Yes, me too 14:40:57 and it is something that I think can atract more users. I mean, by having a CI pipeline that can assure quality for our releases, people get more confortable with the solution that they might adopt 14:41:01 However this looks to me like a fairly big patch. Would it be possible to reduce the scope of the change and just merge it? 14:41:16 I have no idea, we would need to take a look into it 14:41:21 Then we can start adding more Tempest tests. 14:41:23 to see if it is possible and how it works 14:43:40 Maybe if we merge the client.py and base.py for now? 14:44:10 I am not sure 14:44:18 I'm not sure what's needed as a minimum. 14:44:20 I would first need to take a look on how those tests work 14:44:37 I just put them into our agenda so we start discussing and adding energy and time to it 14:44:40 Same here. 14:44:53 Cool. 14:45:41 So, moving on before we run out of time 14:45:44 the last patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/cloudkitty/+/824745 14:45:56 I did not review it yet, but I guess that we should dedicate some time to it 14:45:59 for our next meeting 14:46:04 Hey, thanks for fitting this in, I added that earlier today 14:46:19 No rush, just thought I should bring it up 14:46:33 =) 14:46:37 Cool 14:46:41 thanks for participating 14:47:15 Yeah, thank you! 14:47:25 First contribution to cloudkitty, it's pretty rough but we're adopting it internally. The main sticking point for upstreaming I think would be the requirement for ES7 14:47:51 Though IIRC ES6 is EOL shortly 14:48:24 The Elasticseach backend's been neglected so it's good to see someone wants to improve it. :) 14:48:30 exactly 14:48:44 Some honest critique would be appreciated but as I said, no rush. 14:48:59 Wasaac: this detail about EOL of ES would be interesting in the patch 14:49:17 this also justifies the effort to review and accept the patch 14:49:51 Agreed, you've also reminded me it could do with a story 14:50:00 And completely lacks a spec 14:50:00 that would be interesting as well 14:50:05 +1 14:50:59 Wasaac: What's your prefered method for deploying CloudKitty with Elasticsearch? I'm using kolla-ansible in my test environment but never tried using something different than Influx this way. 14:51:18 Deploying with Kolla Ansible just works 14:51:29 mkarpiarz: kolla-ansible + kayobe 14:51:34 I also use KA 14:51:45 Ah, cool! I'll give it a try then. Thanks, guys. 14:53:23 I've also got a kolla-ansible pr to handle the migration from the single index setup, I'll link the PR when ready 14:53:33 That would be cool 14:53:39 ping me when you have it ready 14:53:47 I have done a few patches there as well 14:56:09 So, moving on before the run out of time 14:56:25 We are going to have OpenInfra Summit in Berlin in June 2022 14:56:58 It would be nice to have some presentations there talking about Clouditty and the interesting features we have been working on for the past two years 14:57:17 I am planning to attend it, but it would be interesting to see you guys there (if you can, of course) 14:57:34 It is a chance for us to get in touch with other people for the OpenStack world 14:59:05 We are going to have to close for today. Thank you guys for participating. Have a nice week. 14:59:08 #endmeeting