18:00:55 #startmeeting qa 18:00:55 Meeting started Wed Jan 22 18:00:55 2025 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gmann. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:55 The meeting name has been set to 'qa' 18:01:22 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting#Agenda_for_next_Office_hours 18:01:24 today agenda ^^ 18:01:33 who all here today 18:01:40 o/ 18:02:44 rlandy: hi 18:03:23 let's go through the regular items first and then we can discuss about devstack new plugin 18:03:27 Hello 18:03:35 mtembo: hi 18:03:39 #topic Announcement and Action Item (Optional) 18:03:42 nothing for this weel 18:03:45 week 18:03:58 #topic Priority Items progress 18:04:10 #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/qa-epoxy-priority 18:05:11 there is no significant progress on items so we can check it next time 18:05:25 #topic OpenStack Events Updates and Planning (Optional) 18:06:09 no event planned in near future but we do have next cycle election coming 18:06:11 #link https://governance.openstack.org/election/ 18:07:05 if there is no candidate for qa PTL role, we either go for DPL model or I will see if I can help as PTL role in next cycle 18:07:16 #topic Gate Status / Fix Checks 18:07:26 #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) 18:07:51 nothing is tagged as urgent fix but afaik I did not see any blocker here 18:08:09 #link Changes with Review-Priority == +1 18:08:18 #topic Changes with Review-Priority == +1 18:08:20 #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) 18:08:40 there is one review tagged as priority, I will check today 18:08:48 #topic Periodic jobs Status Checks 18:09:08 Periodic stable full: 18:09:10 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?pipeline=periodic-stable&job_name=tempest-full-2023-2&job_name=tempest-full-2024-1&job_name=tempest-full-2024-2 18:09:13 all green here 18:09:30 Periodic stable slow: 18:09:32 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-slow-2024-2&job_name=tempest-slow-2024-1&job_name=tempest-slow-2023-2 18:09:40 Periodic extra tests: 18:09:51 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-2024-2-extra-tests&job_name=tempest-full-2024-1-extra-tests&job_name=tempest-full-2023-2-extra-tests 18:09:58 Periodic master: 18:10:10 #link https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?project=openstack%2Ftempest&project=openstack%2Fdevstack&pipeline=periodic 18:11:05 it seems tempest-full-test-account-no-admin-py3 job failing consistently 18:11:50 Details: {'type': 'PolicyNotAuthorized', 'message': 'rule:create_network is disallowed by policy', 'detail': ''} 18:12:11 some neutron rbac policy changed which we might need to check here 18:12:25 I will try if I can find some time to debug it this week 18:12:51 Distros check: 18:12:53 Centos 9: https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=tempest-full-centos-9-stream&job_name=devstack-platform-centos-9-stream&skip=0 18:12:53 Debian: https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-debian-bookworm&skip=0 18:12:53 Rocky: https://zuul.openstack.org/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-rocky-blue-onyx 18:12:53 Jammy: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovn-source&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy-ovs&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-jammy&skip=0 18:12:53 Noble: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-noble&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-noble-ovn-source&job_name=devstack-platform-ubuntu-noble-ovs&skip=0 18:13:24 c9s job which is nv is failing some time which I can say not stable 18:14:22 other job is ok, they are failing sometime but not consistently 18:14:41 also, I will noble job from this list as we are now testing every job on Noble 18:15:12 #topic Open Discussion 18:15:21 rlandy/chandankumar: Ownership of prometheus devstack plugin (repo creation review will be sent after that). Context 18:15:26 rlandy: please go ahead 18:15:29 thanks gmann 18:15:43 I think we pretty much have a suggestion 18:16:09 per sean-k-mooney and chandankumar's discussion 18:16:16 ""we can add the devstack, telemetry and watcher core groups to the plugin core group" 18:16:27 if there are no objections, we can go forward 18:16:36 gmann: ^^ you thoughts? 18:16:41 I read the log 18:17:13 for recording ... 18:17:15 prometheus devstack plugin will be used by both telemetry and watcher projec 18:17:44 so ownership spreads teams 18:17:49 first of all we have to understand what exactly meaning of adding a new project under QA. 18:18:23 Every project (I will say subproject) under QA are maintained by their own core member team. Like tempest, devstack, grenade all have their own core group even some/many of them overlap with same people but idea if to maintained them by their team 18:18:54 similar way if we add any devstack plugin, we need to have a separate plugin team to maintain it 18:19:49 seeing it is related to devstack setup it is all ok to add it under QA project governance but ownership and maintaining responsibility needs to be taken care by this plugin team 18:19:58 (adding a bit more context): https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-qa/%23openstack-qa.2025-01-22.log.html ... I think the general understanding is that some combination of the two teams will look after it 18:20:31 but the general structure will be under QA 18:20:39 for example, if plugin is active now and later we do not have any maintainer to maintain it then we might need to retire it as current QA team cannot maintaint it 18:20:48 understood 18:20:56 This is same for all other devstack plugin 18:21:18 rlandy: yeah, we create the core group from both project or any other project also 18:21:41 +1 18:21:47 but my suggestion is to add a explicit list instead of adding watcher core or telemetry core group itself 18:22:23 and this plugin list can grow if someone other than these two project show interest 18:22:31 I am not sure how the telemetry group is organized but we will pass on your recommendation 18:22:52 we are working closely with them now 18:23:05 rlandy: yeah, maybe we can start with some of you there and then you can check if other member would like to join 18:23:10 perfect than 18:23:20 ok - thank you gmann 18:23:53 as next step, please start the repo creation and propose the governance change to add this under QA with separate group of maintainer 18:24:11 please let me know if any help you need in that 18:24:35 also, frickler is not here at this time but he can also give input on this 18:24:55 will do - this will start tomorrow 18:25:00 I just ready his feedback in log so we all good here 18:25:06 rlandy: perfect 18:25:09 anything else 18:26:24 not from our side 18:26:50 thanks rlandy and chandankumar 18:27:15 I do not see any other topic in agenda, but I will keep it open for couple of min if anything else 18:29:20 let's close if nothing else, thanks everyone for joining 18:29:24 #endmeeting