15:00:23 #startmeeting qa 15:00:23 Meeting started Tue Aug 9 15:00:23 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is kopecmartin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:23 The meeting name has been set to 'qa' 15:00:31 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_Office_hours 15:00:32 agenda ^ 15:00:58 o/ 15:01:17 o/ 15:01:21 \o 15:03:00 \o 15:03:02 let's start 15:03:03 #topic Announcement and Action Item (Optional) 15:03:23 nothing specific from my side, some updates about PTG but we'll get to that 15:03:44 ah, o.k., was about to mention PTG ;) 15:04:05 #topic Zed Priority Items progress 15:04:12 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/qa-zed-priority 15:04:17 any updates here? 15:04:45 as i'm scrolling that etherpad it reminds me I need to revisit FIPS and SRBAC 15:04:53 to figure out where we are at 15:05:59 btw arxcruz is working on 'Use admin clients *only if* admin access needed' effort 15:06:07 i saw a patch already 15:06:11 kopecmartin yes 15:06:22 right now i'm checking what need and what doesn't 15:06:47 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/852377 15:06:48 as we discuss, it might be a good idea to add an option like requires_admin 15:06:53 so we can set per test 15:07:17 how many tests are there like that 15:07:49 gmann around 10 15:07:55 but i'm not sure about tempest plugins 15:08:02 10 tests? 15:08:13 yes, 10 tests 15:08:30 if you check latest failure is less 15:08:43 but i'm not counting the tempest plugins 15:08:49 it's something that we also need to test 15:09:09 not sure how many tempest plugins rely on the manager 15:09:18 all of them should 15:09:27 at least it's advertised like that 15:09:45 i mean, i don't know if the plugins would require admin or not, since we don't activelly test it on tempest side 15:09:58 o/ 15:10:01 it's the next step once i wrap up 15:10:51 true, we can create a few dnm patches on plugins sides to check 15:10:57 tempest plugins can be asked by project team to take care 15:11:35 ok 15:11:37 but we cannot change it directly to os_promary 15:11:46 like done in https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/852377/5/tempest/scenario/manager.py#1158 15:11:47 sounds good to me, i'll let you know when i have the patch in a good state 15:12:05 in that case we need to take client in function signature and use that client to call API. 15:12:57 admin can access any project server but primary (member role) will not be able to so get server API needs to be called with the client who created the server. for example if that is alt or other member role then it will fail 15:13:28 gmann that's why i asked kopecmartin to add a requires_admin option in the signature 15:13:51 and then we can choose either admin or normal one 15:14:05 requires_admin is not needed as caller needs to pass the client as per requested server_id 15:14:22 gmann hmmm, i see 15:14:23 ok 15:14:48 well, not in this case, so in this particular case, need to add the client as an argument 15:15:07 noted, i'll work also with that in mind 15:15:22 +1, thanks 15:16:09 perfect, let's move on 15:16:10 #topic OpenStack Events Updates and Planning 15:16:23 so, it's final, the next PTG is gonna be held virtually 15:16:41 #link 15:16:53 October 17-20 15:17:09 yeah 15:17:13 I'll prepare an etherpad for topics soon 15:17:40 will the slots stay adjusted to Ohio time? or back to the "usual" scheduling? 15:17:52 also will the friday be included again? 15:18:05 otherwise the scheduling we be even more difficult 15:18:47 for QA we'll have a doodle so that we can find slots which will suit all of us 15:18:56 I think we need to wait for scheduling planning from foundation like every virtual PTG. or even team signup may be done again? 15:19:28 I didn't fill the team signup before when it was considered to be in person 15:19:31 virtual PTG has more slot and in different TZ than in-person one 15:19:38 i waited to the last moment :) 15:19:47 I can get those info before our next meeting 15:20:30 I filled the team signup just yesterday, but that's just a general form - no slot schedulling yet 15:20:33 gmann: great, thanks 15:21:50 moving on 15:21:51 #topic Gate Status Checks 15:21:56 #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) 15:22:08 nothing there 15:22:13 any urgent reviews? 15:23:07 #topic Bare rechecks 15:23:11 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/recheck-weekly-summary 15:23:18 QA is down to 0% \o/ 15:23:41 out of 2 15:23:57 still counts :D 15:24:07 :) +1 15:24:39 #topic Periodic jobs Status Checks 15:24:47 stable 15:24:48 #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 15:24:55 master 15:24:55 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Ftempest&project=openstack%2Fdevstack&pipeline=periodic 15:25:08 everything seems all right 15:26:27 #topic Distros check 15:26:32 Centos 9 15:26:32 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-centos-9-stream&job_name=devstack-platform-centos-9-stream&skip=0 15:26:32 Fedora 15:26:34 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-fedora-latest&skip=0 15:26:36 Debian 15:26:38 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-debian-bullseye&skip=0 15:26:40 Jammy 15:26:42 #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 15:26:44 * kopecmartin checking 15:27:12 and cs9 fails again :/ 15:27:29 the others are nicely passing 15:28:18 #topic Sub Teams highlights 15:28:24 Changes with Review-Priority == +1 15:28:29 #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) 15:29:16 there are 3 reviews, one of them is blocked by 15:29:18 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/848364 15:29:27 it's required as depends-on 15:29:50 and this is a cherry-pick of that depends-on 15:29:53 #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/848365 15:30:20 i already voted, gmann and frickler, please check them out when you have a moment 15:30:55 ack 15:31:11 thanks 15:31:13 #topic Open Discussion 15:31:18 anything for the open discussion? 15:32:30 #topic Bug Triage 15:32:37 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/qa-bug-triage-zed 15:32:46 numbers recorded as always 15:33:09 i've just noticed there are 2 new bugs in devstack, one of them has a fix proposed already 15:33:13 ah, I mentioned https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/852378 yesterday 15:33:15 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1983427 15:33:20 but forgot to review 15:33:33 and the other 15:33:35 that should get onto the RP+1 list 15:33:36 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1983816 15:33:57 oh,yeah that's the fix for the second bug frickler 15:34:09 linux mint IMO we should simply mark as not supported 15:34:15 and drop all references to it 15:34:19 https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/848284 came up earlier today which seems to backport cs9 support in devstack? 15:35:43 clarkb: yes, we had that 5 mins ago 15:35:46 frickler: hmm, good point, do we advertise somewhere we support it? i need to check the doc 15:35:54 if not, than yes, we can drop that 15:36:14 on the other hand, if it requires only a small fix, we can keep it if it helps someone 15:36:19 kopecmartin: I don't think so, but there's a reference still in the code, mentioned in the bug iirc 15:36:41 clarkb: yeah, that's blocked by the depends-on , waiting for another core vote 15:36:46 should be done soon 15:37:04 https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack/src/commit/79bef068b69c7e97a63aaa3e7fae13bcbc649ebd/functions-common#L429 15:39:10 from the doc 15:39:12 "DevStack attempts to support the two latest LTS releases of Ubuntu, the latest/current Fedora version, CentOS/RHEL 8 and OpenSUSE." 15:39:39 seems like mint occurrence in the code is a relict 15:39:43 yes. there is on spurious mention in doc/source/plugins.rst 15:40:02 but if we agree, I'll make a patch to drop all that and update the bug accordingly 15:40:28 s/on/one/ 15:40:44 i agree 15:40:52 thanks frickler 15:40:56 I think yes, having that clear in doc will be helpful. agree 15:42:08 anything else to discuss? 15:42:21 nothing from me 15:43:11 ok then, thank you everyone, see you around 15:43:12 #endmeeting