15:00:19 <kopecmartin> #startmeeting qa
15:00:19 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue May 24 15:00:19 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is kopecmartin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:19 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:19 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'qa'
15:00:27 <kopecmartin> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Weekly_QA_Team_meeting
15:00:29 <kopecmartin> agenda ^^
15:00:41 <opendevreview> James Parker proposed openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin master: Take into account shared CPUs per NUMA  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/whitebox-tempest-plugin/+/843157
15:01:27 <gmann> o/
15:02:47 <kopecmartin> o/
15:02:54 <frickler> \o
15:02:57 <kopecmartin> #topic Announcement and Action Item (Optional)
15:03:34 <kopecmartin> we have just dropped openeuler support from devstack
15:04:02 <kopecmartin> nothing else from my side here
15:04:05 <frickler> yes, sadly no continued maintainance once the support was added
15:04:43 <frickler> openstacksdk 0.99.0 was released
15:05:08 <frickler> mainly as a 1.0.0pre1 release. that may trigger some issues
15:05:14 <gmann> +1
15:05:35 <kopecmartin> thanks for the heads up
15:06:01 <kopecmartin> moving on
15:06:01 <kopecmartin> #topic Zed Priority Items progress
15:06:07 <kopecmartin> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/qa-zed-priority
15:06:11 <kopecmartin> any updates on this front?
15:06:20 <gmann> nothing special
15:07:37 <kopecmartin> nothing special from my side either
15:07:49 <kopecmartin> #topic OpenStack Events Updates and Planning
15:07:55 <kopecmartin> nothing here for now
15:07:59 <kopecmartin> #topic Gate Status Checks
15:08:08 <kopecmartin> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/label:Review-Priority%253D%252B2+status:open+(project:openstack/tempest+OR+project:openstack/patrole+OR+project:openstack/devstack+OR+project:openstack/grenade)
15:08:47 <kopecmartin> 2 reviews, both approved, waiting on gates
15:09:13 <gmann> yeah, py36|7 is all stuck
15:09:17 <gmann> and not merged yet
15:10:45 <kopecmartin> yup, mainly because some jobs are quite unstable lately, mainly the ceph one
15:10:56 <kopecmartin> it was a reason of many rechecks
15:11:07 <gmann> yeah, let's see
15:11:52 <kopecmartin> #topic Periodic jobs Status Checks
15:12:00 <kopecmartin> stable
15:12:02 <kopecmartin> #link #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-yoga&job_name=tempest-full-xena&job_name=tempest-full-wallaby-py3&job_name=tempest-full-victoria-py3&job_name=tempest-full-ussuri-py3&pipeline=periodic-stable
15:12:11 <kopecmartin> master
15:12:11 <kopecmartin> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Ftempest&project=openstack%2Fdevstack&pipeline=periodic
15:12:52 <frickler> the "error" thing was me
15:12:58 <frickler> triggered the wrong project
15:13:11 <frickler> but then manual triggers are broken in zuul somehow
15:13:28 <kopecmartin> :) np
15:13:34 <frickler> everything else still suspicously green
15:13:39 <kopecmartin> apart from those 2 errors it's all green
15:13:43 <kopecmartin> yeah
15:14:17 <kopecmartin> #topic Distros check
15:14:28 <kopecmartin> centos9-stream
15:14:29 <kopecmartin> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-centos-9-stream&job_name=tempest-full-py3-centos-8-stream&job_name=devstack-platform-centos-8-stream&job_name=devstack-platform-centos-9-stream&skip=0
15:14:37 <kopecmartin> fedora
15:14:37 <kopecmartin> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-fedora-latest&skip=0
15:14:44 <kopecmartin> debian
15:14:44 <kopecmartin> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-debian-bullseye&skip=0
15:15:19 <frickler> maybe we should also add a link for the jammy jobs?
15:15:22 <kopecmartin> not that bad, could be better though, especially in case of centos as it failed a few gate jobs
15:15:26 <kopecmartin> yeah
15:15:29 <kopecmartin> good point
15:17:50 <kopecmartin> jammy jobs
15:17:51 <kopecmartin> https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovn-source&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovs&skip=0
15:17:53 <kopecmartin> #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovn-source&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovs&skip=0
15:18:17 <frickler> debian looks a bit flaky, I'll check those later
15:19:01 <kopecmartin> ack, thanks
15:19:03 <kopecmartin> #topic Sub Teams highlights
15:19:07 <frickler> ah, those are mainly the ansible v5 checks
15:19:35 <kopecmartin> Changes with Review-Priority == +1
15:19:36 <kopecmartin> #link https://review.opendev.org/q/label:Review-Priority%253D%252B1+status:open+(project:openstack/tempest+OR+project:openstack/patrole+OR+project:openstack/devstack+OR+project:openstack/grenade)
15:20:53 <kopecmartin> regarding the backports in devstack, do we need to merge them in order? from the latest release back? or can i approve all at once?
15:21:44 <gmann> either is fine in devstack bakport
15:21:53 <gmann> approve once also work as we do many times
15:22:38 <kopecmartin> ack, thanks
15:23:00 <kopecmartin> #topic Open Discussion
15:23:05 <kopecmartin> anything for the open discussion?
15:23:21 <frickler> I have one slightly political topic
15:23:24 <gmann> yeah, I have added two items
15:23:33 <gmann> frickler: go ahead first
15:23:38 <frickler> I would like to gather some early planning feedback on the next PTG
15:23:45 <frickler> the foundation seems to think that it is a good idea to have people travelling around the world again
15:23:55 <frickler> to which I 100% do not agree for multiple reasons
15:24:00 <gmann> yeah, its physical event
15:24:02 <frickler> so the question is: can we as a team agree to continue to hold a virtual PTG?
15:24:08 <frickler> maybe outside of the global PTG if some people are still travelling there?
15:24:36 <gmann> good point. even in TC I pointed to ask for community feedback first but that did not happen
15:25:34 <gmann> frickler: once challenge in that is we need to make it either virtual only or physical. hybrid can be more complex
15:25:46 <frickler> I for sure won't travel and I also consider boycotting a mixed one, yes
15:25:54 <gmann> yeah
15:26:28 <kopecmartin> i think we can set a date (different from the PTG one) and hold our own virtual meeting to connect with the community
15:26:49 <gmann> and no slot in physical one?
15:27:43 <kopecmartin> considering the number of attendees during latest PTGs and number of topics as well
15:27:56 <kopecmartin> i would be ok with no slot in the physical event
15:27:58 <gmann> but then it still the issue as frickler pointed
15:28:21 <gmann> we should have in either one. otherwise virtual one will be considered as just a QA call
15:29:29 <gmann> I might travel as it is in USA but not 100% sure, I am totally not fine on travel and completely agree with frickler concern.
15:29:39 <gmann> and I am ok to have virtual one
15:29:49 <kopecmartin> yes, therefore i'm inclined to hold in virtually only, i said i would be ok with no slot in the physical event
15:29:55 <kopecmartin> *hold it
15:29:57 <gmann> +1
15:30:01 <frickler> so maybe not appearing at the in-person PTG as a team would be a good sign towards the foundation
15:30:18 <frickler> I'll also suggest this to other team I'm participating in
15:30:24 <frickler> teams
15:31:15 <frickler> seems we kind of agree on this
15:31:28 <frickler> so gmann you can go ahead with your topics I guess
15:31:31 <kopecmartin> it seems yes
15:31:38 <gmann> yeah
15:31:39 <gmann> sure
15:31:51 <gmann> first is Py36|7 support in Tempest
15:32:27 <gmann> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2022-May/028622.html
15:32:46 <gmann> as you know py36|7 drop in oslo or projects and we though of keeping support in tempest but that is broken
15:33:23 <gmann> I proposed two option on ML and matthew replied from req perspective option1 and how complex that is
15:33:52 <gmann> and even if we go with that we are kind of saying Tempest master code will work on py36 but with old oslo so no new feature from olso?
15:34:22 <gmann> which give a clear indication that it is better to drop it from Tempest also as its deps are non-py36 now
15:35:06 <gmann> one challenge in that Tempest master will not support py36|7 for stable/victoria to stable/yoga as those branch support py36|7
15:35:41 <gmann> which again has two solution 1. run tempest in py38 in virtual env and test stable/yoga on py36 2. use old tempest to test them
15:36:03 <gmann> I am in favor of dropping in tempest, what you say?
15:36:27 <gmann> may be i am just typing things you all know :) but just in case..
15:36:45 <kopecmartin> dropping from tempest and testing with py38 in a venv for older releases sounds good
15:36:56 <frickler> what was the reason again for tempest not to have stable branches?
15:37:00 <gmann> yeah, that is what we did for py27 drop too
15:37:58 <opendevreview> Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/tempest master: DNM: Test encrypted LM with local attach  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/843163
15:38:00 <gmann> frickler: at least still Tempest master can be used to test stable branch and master openstack. yes not in all python version but we have way
15:38:03 <gmann> via virtual env
15:38:27 <gmann> and give us interop testing benefits, testing stable+master openstack with same set of tests
15:38:42 <opendevreview> Artom Lifshitz proposed openstack/tempest master: DNM: Test encrypted LM with local attach  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/843163
15:39:16 <kopecmartin> although if it was branched, it would still work for interop i think
15:39:33 <frickler> you could still test yoga openstack against master tempest, even if a yoga tempest branch exists
15:39:34 <kopecmartin> maybe it would be even easier
15:39:41 <gmann> kopecmartin: well, you will test them with different set of  tests right?
15:40:02 <kopecmartin> right
15:40:13 <gmann> frickler: but then what is benefit or yoga tempest branch if we continue testing with tempest master
15:40:21 <frickler> you do test with a different set of tests now, if <yoga needs tagged tempest
15:40:33 <kopecmartin> oh, on the other side it would require a lot of changes in the interop tooling
15:40:37 <frickler> you could switch once master stops working
15:40:45 <frickler> like now for py36 jobs
15:40:50 <gmann> frickler: no, we will continue testing with master stable/yoga and older supported branch
15:40:56 <frickler> but still backport changes to tests
15:41:45 <frickler> I'm not convinced a py38 venv will work on c8s
15:41:53 <frickler> did someone test that?
15:42:06 <gmann> stable/victoria - stable/yoga tested on ubuntu bionic and it has py38 so tempest virtual env can run on that its just if any downstream cloud want to test py36 stable/yoga then they need to create tempest master virutal env on py38
15:42:40 <gmann> c8s has py38 which worked for me on fips testing switch
15:42:59 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/devstack stable/yoga: Configure placement section in neutron conf  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/842747
15:43:30 <frickler> hmm, o.k., I don't want to argue this, I'm not a tempest person really, just tried to understand things
15:43:58 <gmann> with tempest branch, concern is it can end up like 'disable this test in stable as we change API in incompatible way' and it will pass stable branch testing as well as master even  API are changed
15:44:16 <gmann> and tempest branchless catches these things
15:46:28 <gmann> it is no different than when we dropped py27 but yes it will be same for every py3 minor version drop in OpenStack
15:46:29 <kopecmartin> yeah, let's workaround the situation with the virtual env and py38 for now
15:46:56 <frickler> o.k., I think you still had a second topic?
15:47:13 <gmann> yeah, sorry. I already started thinking on next meeting of release name
15:47:21 <gmann> (gmann) Stable/ussuri is blocked for Tempest master and master constraints
15:47:38 <gmann> this is more of information as I have not finished the work
15:48:00 <gmann> stable/ussuri is in EM and failing with Tempest master and master constraint
15:48:29 <kopecmartin> thanks for the info
15:48:31 <gmann> I started pining tempest for stable/ussuri but then got distracted, I am doing now and should be ready soon https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:ussuri-pin-tempest
15:48:51 <gmann> and I think once we figure this out then we can make new release of tempest
15:49:04 <gmann> which is this #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:ussuri-last
15:49:06 <opendevreview> Rajat Dhasmana proposed openstack/tempest master: Add test to rebuild volume backed instance  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/831018
15:49:16 <gmann> and we can add poy36|7 drop also in that release or so
15:49:27 <gmann> but we agreed on dropping py36|7 from tempest right?
15:50:28 <kopecmartin> gmann: we did
15:50:44 <gmann> cool. I will work on these two gate blocker and should be ready soon
15:50:50 <gmann> that is all from me
15:51:04 <kopecmartin> thank you gmann
15:51:07 <frickler> o.k., just to complete the ansible thing I mentioned
15:51:22 <frickler> zuul currently runs with ansible 2.9 (I think?) which is eol
15:51:45 <frickler> zuul 6.0.0 now supports to switch to ansible 5, which I think is ansible-core 2.12
15:51:48 <clarkb> yes 2.9 is the default
15:52:01 <frickler> there is a test patch up in devstack, which shows some work to do
15:52:19 <frickler> not urgent, but also not to be delayed forever
15:52:31 <clarkb> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/843033 currently it fails when trying to become the stack user. I don't understand it yet but they have a whole document on the problem at https://docs.ansible.com/ansible-core/2.12/user_guide/become.html#risks-of-becoming-an-unprivileged-user
15:52:32 <frickler> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/843033/
15:53:44 <frickler> maybe switch to accessing the test nodes as stack user directly instead of zuul sudoing?
15:54:16 <frickler> or dump the stack user and run as zuul. locally I run as ubuntu all the time
15:54:44 <clarkb> ya I'm not sure yet. Probably good to understand why 2.9 worked but 5 doesn't and go from there
15:56:20 <frickler> o.k., that's it from me, thx clarkb for filling in the details
15:56:23 <kopecmartin> thanks for bringing this up frickler
15:56:52 <kopecmartin> i need to run
15:56:56 <kopecmartin> thank you everyone
15:57:00 <kopecmartin> see you around
15:57:01 <kopecmartin> #endmeeting