15:00:37 #startmeeting manila 15:00:37 Meeting started Thu Nov 20 15:00:37 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:37 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:37 The meeting name has been set to 'manila' 15:00:58 hi 15:01:11 courtesy ping: dviroel vhari Sai ashrodri gireesh 15:01:19 sry, vhari! 15:01:23 o/ 15:02:03 * gouthamr hmm, that ping list needs to be fixed up 15:02:04 hi 15:03:42 kpdev Anoop_Shukla Kumar_T jayaanand others that might be on through Matrix etc, if you'd like to be on the ping list, please edit https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings or let me know.. 15:03:51 o/ 15:04:55 ty for joining, let's get started 15:05:00 #topic Announcements 15:05:30 lets look at the schedule: 15:05:41 #link https://releases.openstack.org/gazpacho/schedule.html (Gazpacho release schedule) 15:06:24 we're in the R-19 week, just past Milestone-1 15:06:49 we published a couple of releases with this milestone 15:07:48 #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/release-announce@lists.openstack.org/message/7TGMSQ3WHEBEXGX7FFUFDXG6BX3SVBCL/ 15:08:28 this one is important, because it might be the last release in the 5.x series 15:08:35 for python-manilaclient 15:09:40 we anticipate bumping the major version numeral in the next release for the package (i.e., 6.0) because we'll be dropping the "manila" CLI 15:10:32 besides that, as we noted on #openstack-manila, the "stable/2024.1" branch across repos was deleted, and replaced with "unmaintained/2024.1" 15:11:10 this means that the branch is no longer actively maintained by the manila core maintainers team, and may see degraded testing/CI 15:12:14 if you need any fixes to land in this branch on any repository, it might be a challenge 15:13:09 since we're past milestone-1, any bug fixes that didn't land in milestone-1 will be re-targeted to milestone-2: 15:13:22 #link https://launchpad.net/manila/+milestone/gazpacho-1 (manila milestone-1 tracker) 15:14:07 (we had none for this milestone in python-manilaclient and manila-ui) 15:15:06 carloss discussed the project specific deadlines in the last week's meeting 15:15:29 he added them here: 15:15:29 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/967724 (manila specific deadlines for Gazpacho) 15:16:15 * gouthamr will rebase that change 15:16:36 lets look at the rendered webpage to note a couple of deadlines: 15:16:42 https://storage.gra.cloud.ovh.net/v1/AUTH_dcaab5e32b234d56b626f72581e3644c/zuul_opendev_logs_323/openstack/323ea75642594f5f86c1995cb4b91e86/docs/gazpacho/schedule.html 15:17:04 four weeks from now, Dec 15 - Dec 19 is our proposed Spec Freeze 15:17:31 ten weeks from now, Jan 26 - Jan 30 is our feature proposal freeze and our new driver submission deadline 15:18:28 in twelve weeks, i.e., Feb 09 - Feb 13 - we'll have a midcycle - typically a nice venue for collab reviews and some more planning 15:18:46 we'll have a bugsquash past milestone-3 15:19:21 in the past we've done another hack-a-thon - this time we were planning review jams 15:20:59 we could do one just around our spec freeze deadline perhaps 15:21:33 time will seem to run a lot faster this release, thanks to the year-end holidays across the world 15:21:45 any questions/concerns with this plan? 15:22:54 looks good 15:24:20 ty, i'll rebase the change and it'll likely merge and show up in the Gazpacho schedule page soon 15:24:47 the final announcement i had is that this meeting will not be held next week 15:25:12 several folks are out due to holidays and well deserved time off.. 15:25:50 we #openstack-manila 15:26:09 ^ grr, we'll still be able to use #openstack-manila to have any discussion in the interim 15:26:24 and if you prefer long form, the openstack-discuss mailing list 15:27:23 the next meeting will hence be on Dec 4th 2025, and i'll be hosting it then too, carloss will resume on the 11th 15:27:39 that's all the announcements i had - we spent some time there :D 15:27:43 does anyone else have any? 15:28:51 alright, lets move on.. 15:28:51 #topic Continuation of the PTG retrospective 15:29:45 ty for participating in the meetpad discussion last week 15:31:42 i think we concluded that we do lack core reviewer bandwidth, and we're short of at least 3-4 reviewers.. one option was to create a separate "manila-reviewers" group to accord folks with +2 powers, and anyone from "manila-core" (the existing core group) can continue to +2, and merge changes. 15:32:08 carloss will likely work on this when he returns 15:33:50 besides that, we also discussed publishing our "review focus" process to the docs, i can take this AI and do this after our meeting today.. we could begin using gerrit's hashtags too as an experiment... lets try that in the Dec 4th meeting 15:34:21 because we did note that review focus will still be discussed every week at this meeting 15:35:07 there are several other AIs at the end of that, which, will be acted slowly through the release 15:36:10 i'll lightly introduce the items we didn't talk about: 15:36:10 - Tackling tech debt (ipv6 testing, failing rally jobs, degraded CI, privsep migration and secure rbac) 15:36:23 these items need owners & 15:37:34 if you're interested to take on any of these, or help with them, please ping me on #openstack-manila 15:38:19 not all of these are _urgent_, but, you'll have the goodwill of the community when you help us with these important tasks :) 15:39:01 vhari: i am unsure if you added any of the following items: 15:39:01 - Improve bug-fix/feature contributions 15:39:01 - Reduce bug backlog - focus on stale bug resolution 15:39:34 gouthamr, ack they are 15:39:57 wrt stale bugs .. adopt a more aggressive review and resolution process 15:41:01 ++ i recall a brief discussion, i'm all for it.. 15:41:01 if there's a bug that's pending for X amount of time, it can't be "medium" or "low", it can be downgraded to "wishlist" 15:41:01 and "wishlist" bugs can expire after Y amount of time 15:41:32 i think we can setup these rules on launchpad, or, use their API and automate this sorta workflow 15:42:08 ack that was the idea to help backlog resolution 15:42:39 okay, any disagreements with this approach? 15:43:19 What is the next step for reviving expired bug? 15:43:26 Create as new? 15:44:41 i think someone from the bug supervisors group can revive it 15:45:02 but, yeah, ideally reporting a new one is a better approach 15:45:23 even if there's a lot of context/discussion in the previous one, you could still link to it 15:45:32 it just wouldn't show up in the list of active bugs 15:45:50 we have not hit this issue in the past, but the idea was to reopen the bug if needed 15:46:31 to preserve previous comments and bug history 15:47:49 I would incline to new bug approach 15:48:46 Sometimes the bug might get old and is applicable for old openstack patches only. Just my 2 cents. :) 15:49:37 true.. launchpad does make it a bit hard to look for expired bugs too, intentionally.. 15:50:12 you'll have to use the advanced search page: https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bugs?advanced=1 15:51:11 anyway, lets try and chase this process down by milestone-2 vhari 15:51:32 and we can share details when we have some automation or LP configuration items identified 15:51:39 ty for the inputs Kumar_T 15:51:45 anything else for $topic? 15:53:24 #topic Review Focus 15:53:24 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/manila-gazpacho-review-focus (Gazpacho review focus) 15:54:20 kpdev: do you know if chuanm intends to continue his work on https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/manila-specs/+/933558 (share group affinity policy) 15:54:35 I will check with him 15:55:25 ty 15:55:39 We need to close the qos-type spec review. 15:56:09 yes, i see that there's now code to look at too: 15:56:09 #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22bp/qos-types%22 15:56:17 I will take a look at @kpdev comments on the spec 15:56:22 yes, I added code PR today 15:57:01 ty Anoop_Shukla_ ; i think with the discussion we had regarding the "loose" association between share types and qos types - the last major concern i had was addressed 15:57:06 and also continue working on it, code is not ready for review yet... but spec is ready. 15:57:12 ack, ty kpdev 15:57:17 will look at this too 15:57:17 Can we get one more eye from another storage team to make sure what we will be implementing will work for other drivers? 15:57:30 nileshthathagar perhaps ^ 15:57:55 Okay 15:58:29 sure but i need to which of dell drivers supports qos 15:58:56 @nileshthathagar: qos type is more of template of offering a way to apply qos on resources . the driver can apply them on share or share servers or other resources. 16:00:16 okay, we're at the hour.. 16:00:22 My only concern is..some of the decisions like modifying of qos-type we have taken is based on what NetApp storage supports.. 16:00:32 It may not be true in case of other storage vendors. 16:00:41 that's a valid concern 16:00:43 ok so we only needs to check qos specs right? 16:01:24 lets wrap this up here and go to #openstack-manila; or likely continue the discussion on the spec so we can all participate 16:02:10 we couldn't discuss bugs too, vhari 16:02:11 Cool 16:02:23 if we had any pressing ones, we could triage them on #openstack-manila this week 16:02:36 i think we'd need to given we're not catching up here next week :) 16:02:54 thank you all for joining and for the discussion.. 16:03:09 i'll see you here on Dec 4th and on #openstack-manila in the meantime 16:03:12 #endmeeting