15:01:59 #startmeeting horizon 15:02:05 Meeting started Wed May 5 15:01:59 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is vishalmanchanda. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:02:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:02:08 The meeting name has been set to 'horizon' 15:03:49 hi anyone around for horizon meeting? 15:04:04 o/ 15:04:52 o/ 15:05:40 Let's start the meeting. 15:06:01 #topic Notices 15:06:20 I have no notices for this week. 15:07:05 tmazur: rdopiera : Do you have notice to announce or we can move to next topic? 15:07:36 I have something for bug triage. Shall I wait or we can do it now? 15:08:15 we can discuss it during open-discussion. 15:08:19 Ok 15:08:41 #topic nodjs migration 15:08:56 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22migrate-to-nodejs14%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged) 15:09:30 Most of the patches already have one +2, Please review them so that we can move to next step i.e. drop nodejs10 jobs. 15:10:11 I have also purposed a patch to governance to change runtime of nodejs to nodejs14 last week and it is already merged. 15:10:23 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/788306 15:11:20 Note: horizon cores can also give +2 on plugins patches and approve them if it is already have +2 from plugin team. 15:11:56 note that it is true for most plugins (not all) 15:12:14 yeah. 15:13:02 ok moving on to next topic 15:13:14 #topic django migration 15:13:41 no update on this topic. 15:13:56 django-pyscss owner didn't responded yet to my email. 15:14:25 I will send a reminder after the meeting. 15:14:56 amotoki: I have a question regarding this topic? 15:15:41 vishalmanchanda: I am confused with your question mark 15:16:29 Can't we purpose patches to django-pyscss fork which is created by ivan to make it work with django3.x 15:16:58 vishalmanchanda: which fork do you mean? 15:17:08 I wonder what we do if django-pyscss owner didn't respond 15:17:45 do you mean a github fork by Ivan? 15:17:53 https://github.com/e0ne/django-pyscss 15:17:56 amotoki: yes 15:18:03 I am not sure Ivan would like to be a new owner for the fork or not. 15:18:11 it or switch to the django-sass-processor 15:18:22 fork it or * 15:18:52 rdopiera: have you tried django-sass-processor? 15:19:11 vishalmanchanda: I started on it today, but didn't get it working yet 15:19:21 rdopiera: ok. 15:19:34 one nice thing that it has is that you can add python functions to it 15:19:40 IMHO at least we should not depend on a personal effort. 15:20:09 if we fork the upstream as horizon team, we should do it as a team (not depending on a private github repo) 15:20:23 unless someone would like to maintain it 15:20:53 that's why moving it under opendev might make sense 15:21:04 rdopiera: =1 15:21:07 +1 15:21:20 rdopiera: +1. 15:23:01 on the other hand, perhaps we don't want to maintain it for general purposes (even if we fork it under opendev) so it might be a transient solution 15:24:10 we would have to rename the fork anyways 15:24:46 we could as well rename it to something horizon-specific 15:24:55 to discourage use by other projects 15:25:18 yeah, that's true 15:26:56 Ok let's wait for one more week if django-pyscss owner responds otherwise we have to move forward either with horizon-specific django-pyscss fork or django-sass-processor. 15:27:59 moving to next topic. 15:28:10 #Support for Angular 1.8.x in Horizon 15:28:23 #topic Support for Angular 1.8.x in Horizon 15:28:49 Some of the horizon angular panels (keypair and glance) are broken in Debian Bullseye distribution. 15:29:26 there is mail about it on open-discuss 15:29:32 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-May/022243.html 15:30:12 I have never used Debian so far. 15:30:33 As of now we use angular 1.5.8.0 https://github.com/openstack/horizon/blob/master/requirements.txt#L44 15:30:47 should we add <1.8 to our requirements for Angular? 15:31:58 rdopiera: what if we update angular to 1.8.2? 15:33:45 that would be great, however, I have no idea how to do it and how much work it would be 15:34:21 I can see some breaking changes but not sure yet if we are affected or not 15:35:49 rdopiera: if we add <1.8 to our requirements for Angular does that fix the issue? 15:36:31 vishalmanchanda: it moves the problem from us to the Debian maintainers ;-) 15:37:00 but no, it does not fix it 15:37:25 rdopiera: I have no idea about that. 15:38:05 Updating angular to 1.8.2 requires a lot of code changes. 15:39:04 just ignore my suggestion, we are in the best position to fix it 15:39:40 I have started doing that in the morning but I am able to do it only for 2 files taking reference from old patches. 15:43:27 rdopiera: what if I pushed an initial patch to upgrade angular-js to 1.8.2 15:43:40 rdopiera: Could you help me with reviews? 15:44:40 vishalmanchanda: I still haven't learned Angular 15:44:56 I definitely can :) 15:45:34 tmazur: thanks. 15:46:54 I am also not an expert on angular but I will push some code for the upgrade taking reference from old patches. 15:47:39 Yeah, let's see how it breaks everything 15:47:54 (I hope not though) 15:47:56 tmazur: 🙂 15:48:23 I am sure it will break many panels 15:48:34 But Let's see. 15:50:00 meanwhile, I will report a new bug for this upgarde so it's easy to track. 15:50:39 #topic open-discussion 15:51:02 So, speaking of bugs 15:51:58 Here's an etherpad page for triage. https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/horizon-bug-triage 15:52:18 To not overwhelm us, I took a look at the first 10 15:53:31 tmazur: great work:) 15:53:44 Two of the newest bugs seemed pretty simple so I've commited patches. Also the one about release notes needs reviews. 15:54:07 which order? latest ones first? 15:54:24 One appeared to be a duplicate, two are about system scope, so I've marked them as high priority and triaged 15:54:35 Yes, latest ones first. 15:54:47 the one about novaclient logs is fixed and merged, not sure if we want backports 15:55:12 Since we have a lot of them, I've decided to start from the top now. Later I am planning to look through the oldest 15:55:42 Actually, I've closed some old ones too, just not added them here, again, to not overwhelm us. 15:55:52 regarding automation, are we considering moving from Selenium to Cypress.io in the future? 15:55:59 apart from bug triage, I have another topic on stable branch EOL. Discussion on otaca and pike EOL started. Who would like to maintain these in horizon? 15:56:47 tmazur: you can assign bugs on system scope to me. 15:57:03 amotoki: ok, thanks! 15:57:41 rdopiera: tmazur: do you still need to have ocata and pike branches? 15:57:46 So essentially: please review the ones that are on review, please take a look at ones that need confirmation. Feel free to add your notes! 15:58:47 amotoki: we will drop support for osp13 later this year, and only support osp16+ since, so we don't need anything older than Train 15:59:25 rdopiera: which stable branch corresponds to osp13? 15:59:41 Queens 16:00:08 so, you don't see a block for ocata and pike EOL? 16:00:18 at least from osp perspective? 16:00:19 correct 16:00:46 vishalmanchanda is our PTL and release liaison, so perhaps it is in his radar. 16:00:51 guys we are out of time. 16:01:10 let's discuss it in horizon channel. 16:01:25 Thanks everyone for your contribution. 16:01:39 Thanks everyone! 16:01:44 #endmeeting