16:00:00 <bauzas> #startmeeting nova
16:00:00 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue Dec 14 16:00:00 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is bauzas. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:00 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:00 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'nova'
16:00:15 <bauzas> hey everyone who is not yet on PTO :p
16:00:25 <gibi> o/
16:00:39 <gmann> o/
16:01:26 <bauzas> let's do a quick meeting given I'm not sure we have a lot of quorum for this one :)
16:01:41 <bauzas> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova#Agenda_for_next_meeting
16:01:54 <elodilles> o/
16:02:31 <bauzas> #topic Bugs (stuck/critical)
16:02:42 <bauzas> #info No Critical bug
16:02:47 <bauzas> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=New 24 new untriaged bugs (+0 since the last meeting)
16:02:52 <bauzas> #help Nova bug triage help is appreciated https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/BugTriage
16:02:57 <bauzas> #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/openstack/placement 25 open stories (+0 since the last meeting) in Storyboard for Placement
16:03:05 <bauzas> any bug in particular to discuss ?
16:03:44 <gibi> -
16:03:56 <bauzas> nice
16:04:05 <bauzas> #topic Gate status
16:04:10 <bauzas> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bugs?field.tag=gate-failure Nova gate bugs
16:04:25 <bauzas> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Fplacement&pipeline=periodic-weekly Placement periodic job status
16:04:31 <bauzas> #info Please look at the gate failures, file a bug, and add an  elastic-recheck signature in the opendev/elastic-recheck repo (example: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/759967)
16:04:43 <bauzas> crickets for me
16:04:52 <bauzas> nothing to tell about gate bugs or placement jobs
16:04:56 <bauzas> both work
16:05:17 <bauzas> anything to discuss about our gate ?
16:05:40 <gibi> -
16:05:43 <bauzas> nice too
16:05:45 <bauzas> #topic Release Planning
16:05:47 <gibi> I was more preoccupied with the neutron gate this week
16:05:50 <bauzas> #info Yoga-2 is due Jan 6th
16:05:56 <bauzas> #link https://releases.openstack.org/yoga/schedule.html#y-2
16:06:00 <bauzas> #info 2nd spec review day happens today on Dec 14th
16:06:13 <bauzas> so we have like 6 or 7 specs to look at
16:06:27 <bauzas> we only merged one spec which was a fast reapproval
16:06:56 <bauzas> some are quite in a good direction but maybe we will have not enough time for merging them *before* yoga-2
16:07:25 <gibi> yeah if things are not landing this week then it will be hard
16:07:34 <gibi> to land them without cores :D
16:07:43 <bauzas> if people don't disagree, I'll propose an exceptional spec approval deadline exception during our first meeting of 2022
16:07:54 <bauzas> exception process*
16:08:02 <gibi> sure, lets see what we will have open then
16:08:13 <bauzas> yup
16:08:28 <bauzas> not a reason to not look at the open specs
16:08:39 <bauzas> but just saying that one week more shouldn't be a problem
16:09:03 * bauzas wonders btw. why the TC accepted a milestone so close to holidays
16:09:09 <sean-k-mooney> yes that shoudl be workable solong as we dont let it drag out too long
16:09:09 <bauzas> either way, this is what it is
16:09:46 <bauzas> anything to discuss about this ?
16:09:48 <sean-k-mooney> well not all project have a m2 spec freeze
16:09:59 <sean-k-mooney> so it may be less impactful on others
16:10:05 <sean-k-mooney> not form me
16:10:19 <gmann> yeah, its project to project
16:10:20 <bauzas> sean-k-mooney: you're right, this is maybe us who haven't considered it correctly when we thought about Yoga-2 as a spec freeze
16:10:34 <bauzas> anyway, not a problmem
16:10:48 <bauzas> we'll see how things go after new year
16:10:57 <bauzas> #topic Review priorities
16:11:02 <bauzas> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/status:open+(project:openstack/nova+OR+project:openstack/placement)+label:Review-Priority%252B1
16:11:07 <bauzas> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/816861 bauzas proposing a documentation change for helping contributors to ask for reviews, needs a second +2
16:11:13 <bauzas> thanks gibi btw.
16:11:29 <gibi> thanks bauzas
16:11:49 <gmann> I am ok with that, just 1 comment i added to make it clear on non-core adding +1
16:11:49 <gibi> the current list of review prio looks OK to me
16:11:51 <bauzas> about the unified limits series, I was confused with what to review but this is fixed
16:12:00 <gmann> but that is ok to add  in followup also, not blocker
16:12:08 <bauzas> after discussing it with melwitt internally
16:12:23 <bauzas> gmann: ack, will look
16:12:48 <bauzas> I really want us to merge the unified limits series, this has been overdue for too long
16:12:58 <sean-k-mooney> i agree
16:13:17 <bauzas> so I'll continue to review, but given melwitt's on PTO, I guess the progress would be better after next year
16:13:18 <sean-k-mooney> unified limist assumign its readay i think would be a big win and release highlight
16:14:02 <gibi> there is a list of patches on the  yoga-python-testing that we need to look at I will add them to priorities
16:14:13 <bauzas> any series or patches that people would want to highlight to the team for reviews ?
16:14:14 <sean-k-mooney> gmann: on a related note do we have a nova spec for the chagne in RBAC direction and what that means for nova
16:14:22 <bauzas> heh, jinxed by gibi
16:14:27 <bauzas> gibi: patches ?
16:14:32 <gibi> yep
16:14:37 <gibi> gmann has a list of them
16:14:40 <bauzas> gibi: I mean, links ?
16:15:09 <gmann> yeah, this is list for auditing all policy #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/rbac
16:15:11 <gibi> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-novaclient/+/819208
16:15:15 <gibi> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/os-traits/+/819205
16:15:18 <gibi> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/osc-placement/+/819203
16:15:21 <gibi> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/821636
16:15:25 <gibi> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/placement/+/819206
16:15:30 <gmann> and we can do audit in wiki page in one shot or in code changes also.
16:15:41 <gmann> gibi: thanks
16:16:25 <bauzas> gibi: I marked the nova and placement ones with the R-P flag
16:16:33 <gmann> sean-k-mooney: that was for RBAC one, and we have BP also for that #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/policy-defaults-refresh-2
16:16:50 <bauzas> sean-k-mooney: we said on a meeting yes for a specless BP approval
16:16:54 <gmann> yeah
16:16:56 <bauzas> (for the policy thing)
16:17:01 <sean-k-mooney> bauzas: ok
16:17:16 <sean-k-mooney> normally i think we shoudl treath policy like an api change
16:17:31 <sean-k-mooney> and use a spec for it but we can proceed without one for now
16:17:46 <bauzas> this is the defaults, but meh
16:17:47 <gmann> I have pushed SYSTEM reader->system admin on top of dansmith  server policy changes. and I will be pushing more changes this week
16:17:58 <sean-k-mooney> bauzas: well to me policy change are interop issues
16:18:09 <bauzas> sean-k-mooney: I don't disagree
16:18:13 <sean-k-mooney> so change default is a breaking change but lest not repoen that
16:18:27 <bauzas> but for users, those are transparent if defaults correctly scoped
16:18:36 <gmann> well policy change does not require spec always. we have fixed (new or default change) many as bug also
16:19:09 <gmann> yeah, as it is overall change in RBAC, and as described in goal we have way that users will be broken by default
16:19:23 <gmann> and migration path and plan for them to new policy in next release
16:19:45 <gmann> *user will not be broken
16:19:53 <gmann> sorry for typo. :)
16:20:11 <sean-k-mooney> just to not consume all the time on this is the plan this cycle to walk back the work we had done and focus on identifying the work need with most of the new work happing next cycle
16:20:20 <sean-k-mooney> i will review the wiki you provided offline
16:20:40 <gmann> yeah, specially we are isloating the system form project resource and no system reader in yoga
16:20:52 <sean-k-mooney> ack
16:21:11 <gmann> sean-k-mooney: thanks, wiki audit will be helpful
16:21:48 <bauzas> I think we also said that the TC would document this
16:22:02 <bauzas> the policy changes, I mean
16:22:14 <bauzas> I even wrote this in the BP when I approved
16:22:14 <sean-k-mooney> its in the tc spec to some degree
16:22:20 <gmann> basically this is what we will do (phase1 ) in nova in yoga #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/selected/consistent-and-secure-rbac.html#phase-1
16:22:22 <bauzas> that's my point
16:22:24 <sean-k-mooney> i would like to see a nova game plan for how to aling to that
16:22:35 <sean-k-mooney> which is why i ask about a nova spec
16:22:57 <sean-k-mooney> but if most of that work will happen next cycle im fine with the wiki and specless blueprint for this cycle
16:22:59 <bauzas> that's why we said we can start to digest and see whether we need to document more the changes in the spec
16:23:03 <bauzas> right
16:23:08 <bauzas> moving on ?
16:23:12 <sean-k-mooney> +1
16:23:16 <gmann> yeah, its there in TC goal
16:23:41 <bauzas> #topic Stable Branches
16:23:46 <bauzas> stable gates are not blocked
16:23:49 <bauzas> shit
16:23:56 <bauzas> elodilles: it's you who should tell it
16:24:06 <elodilles> :)
16:24:12 <elodilles> so they are not blocked
16:24:16 <gibi> :D
16:24:18 <elodilles> (as far as I've seen it before the meeting with a quick double-check)
16:24:28 <gmann> i thought it is very blocked and bauzas typo :)
16:24:30 <elodilles> though on some branches (wallaby, victoria?) patches need many rechecks to be able to merge
16:24:58 <bauzas> interesting dystopîa
16:25:05 <bauzas> between gmann and elodilles
16:25:05 <elodilles> gmann: hopefully not o:)
16:25:16 <gmann> \o/
16:25:42 <elodilles> or are they? :-o
16:27:50 <bauzas> so, what to say ? I guess we need to double check
16:27:51 <bauzas> :)
16:28:32 <elodilles> i haven't seen any blocking issue, but i'm now confused :)
16:28:58 <elodilles> gmann: did i miss something?
16:29:16 <gmann> ah no, I have not seen too. I think recheck is more needed that is uit
16:29:18 <gmann> it
16:29:44 <gmann> I saw in other project stable/train but not nova
16:30:17 <elodilles> oh, thanks
16:30:43 <elodilles> cool for nova then
16:30:55 <bauzas> I guess we can reasonable move on as nothing will change during those days I guess
16:31:00 <bauzas> nothing actionable I mean,
16:31:05 <bauzas> but who knows
16:31:07 <elodilles> ++
16:31:28 <bauzas> #topic Sub/related team Highlights
16:31:42 <bauzas> skipping libvirt's point, as lyarwood is on PTO
16:31:55 <bauzas> #topic Open discussion
16:32:09 <bauzas> aaaand that's it, we consumed all the items
16:32:29 <bauzas> last call for anything anyone
16:32:46 <gibi> happy PTO everyone! :D
16:32:56 <sean-k-mooney> o/
16:33:18 <gibi> I hope I will be bored at the end of my PTO
16:33:23 <gmann> \o
16:34:02 <gmann> gibi: more beer can company you :)
16:34:11 <gibi> :)
16:35:34 <bauzas> happy new year for everyone indeed
16:35:51 <bauzas> safe travels for those who visit family or do leisure
16:36:01 <bauzas> safe beers for those who stay at home
16:36:33 <gmann> you too. thanks
16:36:41 <bauzas> and hopefully, make a wish for 2022 eventually be the time for seeing us together :)
16:37:40 <bauzas> that being said, let's call it a year.
16:37:43 <gibi> \o/
16:37:46 <bauzas> thanks
16:37:53 <bauzas> #endmeeting