14:02:26 <mnasiadka> #startmeeting kolla
14:02:26 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Mar 12 14:02:26 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mnasiadka. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:02:26 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:02:26 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'kolla'
14:02:31 <mnasiadka> #topic rollcall
14:02:34 <mnasiadka> o/
14:02:37 <frickler> \o
14:02:38 <r-krcek> o/
14:02:44 <frickler> still jetlagged? ;)
14:02:47 <mmalchuk> o/
14:03:43 <mnasiadka> frickler: sort of, doing a lot of things at the same time to catch up two weeks absence :)
14:04:09 <mnasiadka> darmach koperg wake up :)
14:04:43 <mnasiadka> #topic agenda
14:05:00 <mnasiadka> * Announcements
14:05:08 <mnasiadka> * CI status
14:05:16 <mnasiadka> * Release tasks
14:05:24 <mnasiadka> * Current cycle planning
14:05:30 <mnasiadka> * Additional agenda (from whiteboard)
14:05:34 <mnasiadka> * Open discussion
14:05:37 <mnasiadka> #topic Announcements
14:06:18 <mnasiadka> So... I'm in New Zealand time zone when the PTG happens - so PTG will be around 7AM UTC time slot - I'll post those on openstack-discuss ML once I book these and create an etherpad for Kolla
14:06:34 <mnasiadka> or something like that
14:06:38 <mnasiadka> #topic CI status
14:06:54 <mnasiadka> Seems we have some neutron-metadata-agent healthchecking issues
14:07:05 <mnasiadka> Trying to debug it in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/944104
14:07:28 <mnasiadka> Also add some more debug to CI logs for unhealthy containers, so we don't have to do that next time.
14:07:45 <mnasiadka> I've seen some rabbitmq podman related container state problems, but I assume it's different
14:07:56 <mnasiadka> (although these don't happen every time)
14:08:03 <mnasiadka> #topic Release tasks
14:08:15 <frickler> for metadata maybe neutron changed something?
14:08:31 <frickler> might be related to eventlet removal and change timings somehow
14:08:36 <mnasiadka> Might be, that's why I need to first check if for example the process name did not change or something similar - we need more debug logs
14:08:58 <mnasiadka> And maybe better healthchecking scripts, but that's not going to happen soon ;)
14:09:05 <frickler> ack
14:09:08 <mnasiadka> It's R-3
14:09:18 <mnasiadka> We might see breakages due to some last minute patches
14:09:40 <mnasiadka> I don't think we have any immediate work to do - koperg is working on Ansible bump
14:09:50 <mnasiadka> #topic Current cycle planning
14:10:02 <mnasiadka> Anybody wants to discuss any feature? any review requests?
14:10:18 <yuval> I have this one: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/938649
14:10:25 <yuval> I think its merge ready
14:10:41 <mmalchuk> yep. cinder issue in nova with tempest
14:10:50 <mmalchuk> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/937038/6
14:11:02 <mmalchuk> frickler:
14:11:11 <seunghunlee> I have https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla/+/934735
14:11:11 <frickler> I have a simple ironic-related patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla/+/942785 and bbezak had another one which we might want to combine
14:11:57 <frickler> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla/+/933860
14:12:09 <frickler> I'll add the others above to my list
14:12:29 <mnasiadka> yuval: one last question and I'm happy to apply my +2 ;)
14:13:20 <mmalchuk> frickler: can we go back with catalog_info in 6 patchet?
14:14:44 <frickler> mmalchuk: I don't think we should backport in kolla anyway, but I'll update, yes
14:16:46 <mmalchuk> frickler: but we need merge in master an I mean 6 patchset
14:16:51 <mmalchuk> not latest
14:16:55 <mnasiadka> ok, added the rest of the patches to my review queue
14:17:38 <opendevreview> yuval proposed openstack/kolla-ansible master: add lightbits driver support  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/938649
14:17:42 <seunghunlee> Thanks
14:18:44 <yuval> mnasiadka: you right, removed :)
14:20:08 <mnasiadka> #topic Additional agenda (from whiteboard)
14:20:47 <mnasiadka> Nothing new there
14:21:01 <mnasiadka> #topic Open discussion
14:21:02 <mnasiadka> Anybody anything?
14:23:10 <yuval> yea
14:23:14 <yuval> I got a question
14:23:20 <mnasiadka> shoot
14:23:31 <yuval> I want to add an env variable to the cinder docker
14:23:49 <yuval> currently I am forking out from the main branch to do it using the group_vars
14:24:06 <yuval> and kolla-supported way to do it?
14:24:11 <yuval> any*
14:25:17 <yuval> this is the reason I need to do it: https://opendev.org/openstack/os-brick/src/commit/6e83ac6eeee8f3a4b3265a4e927dca1bc190e088/os_brick/privileged/__init__.py#L24
14:25:36 <mnasiadka> Not really, we have some places where we do supply environment in role defaults/ and then use it when starting the container, but not in Cinder
14:25:58 <mnasiadka> Like https://github.com/openstack/kolla-ansible/blob/b952debacc0b6516468d6fd8121facc65eb4d9c1/ansible/roles/etcd/defaults/main.yml#L7
14:26:43 <frickler> to me that looks like a bad design decision in os-brick
14:26:47 <yuval> yes.. maybe we can do some magic so we can control this in any docker we bring up?
14:27:10 <yuval> frickler: totally agree - I uploaded a change for it but was rejected
14:28:48 <frickler> I don't see any rejection here https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-brick/+/942689
14:29:31 <yuval> yes... silent rejection
14:30:03 <frickler> cinder team is just almost non-existent in my experience
14:30:05 <yuval> anyway I will think how we can control it and bring up a patch
14:31:05 <yuval> frickler: no, no, They are doing amazing job. it just doing this change is not trivial
14:31:06 <mnasiadka> Ok then
14:32:01 <mnasiadka> I guess that's it
14:32:06 <MattCrees[m]> Sorry, missed the current cycle planning. Could we get some core reviewer eyes on the big rabbitmq patch chain again please? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/924623 and https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/kolla-ansible/+/942867 are good to go imo.
14:32:22 <koperg[m]> @mnasiadka: sorry missed the start of the meeting ( client work ) We can consider ansible bump technically done - thanks for your help :D
14:32:53 <MattCrees[m]> We have quite a few to patches get through if we want RabbitMQ 4.0 in epoxy :)
14:33:22 <mnasiadka> Well, we need more reviewers it seems.
14:33:53 <mnasiadka> If you guys would review not only the patches you want to get in, maybe we'd get more core reviewers...
14:35:08 <yuval> I will try
14:37:08 <darmach> +1
14:37:16 <darmach> (me too)
14:37:32 <koperg[m]> Can take a look, if you are satisfied with +1 :P
14:38:16 <MattCrees[m]> Ok, I'll try to make time to review other patches.
14:38:52 <mnasiadka> Reality is, that there are 4 active core reviewers, and we can't have velocity to merge everything - and the situation is getting worse, not better.
14:39:24 <mnasiadka> If your employers value/use kolla/kolla-ansible/kayobe - they should invest more.
14:39:28 <mnasiadka> That's my 5 cents :)
14:39:31 <mnasiadka> Thank you for coming - see you next week :)
14:39:42 <mnasiadka> #endmeeting