18:00:13 <gouthamr> #startmeeting tc 18:00:13 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue Oct 8 18:00:13 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gouthamr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:13 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:13 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'tc' 18:00:22 <cardoe> \o 18:00:27 <gouthamr> Welcome to the weekly meeting of the OpenStack Technical Committee. A reminder that this meeting is held under the OpenInfra Code of Conduct available at https://openinfra.dev/legal/code-of-conduct. 18:00:34 <gouthamr> Today's meeting agenda can be found at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee 18:00:38 <gouthamr> #topic Roll Call 18:00:40 <gmann> o/ 18:00:41 <bauzas> \o 18:00:45 <slaweq> o/ 18:00:52 <noonedeadpunk> o/ 18:00:55 <cardoe> \o 18:01:53 <gouthamr> noted absence: f r i c k l e r 18:02:52 <gouthamr> courtesy ping: spotz[m] gtema 18:02:52 <spotz[m]> o/ 18:03:00 <spotz[m]> ha! 18:03:05 <gtema> o/ 18:03:47 <gouthamr> awesome; that's more than the quorum.. thanks for joining; lets get started 18:04:14 <gouthamr> #topic Last Week's AIs 18:04:28 <gouthamr> 1) Respond to the Watcher mail thread and ask for an update this week (gouthamr) 18:04:54 <gouthamr> so i did this; but not early enough :/ 18:05:04 <gouthamr> #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/3DRYZFDPVCZ45TOULOZ4R7K6BUOIHLU2/ ([tc][watcher] No leaders for project team, heading to retirement) 18:05:46 <gouthamr> sean-k-mooney isn't here; but will poke him where he is 18:06:33 <gouthamr> so lets get some status between this meeting and the next one there 18:06:36 <gouthamr> 2) Review the patch for marking Kuryr-related projects inactive this week (Patch: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/929698) (everyone) 18:07:01 <gouthamr> we have sufficient votes here; so i'll press the workflow button here 18:07:51 <gouthamr> 3) Share the PTG planning etherpad on the mailing list and ask interested participants to vote on topics, indicating their time zones (gouthamr) 18:07:59 <gouthamr> #link https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/message/YDG3VCGHGRMZ7KBPW4JWJDXKO4OUZIE7/ ([all][tc][ptl][ptg] TC Discussions at the PTG - Sign Up and Suggest Topics) 18:08:30 <gouthamr> ^ not a lot of sign ups there; but, we have timeslots for our sessions now 18:08:51 <gouthamr> #link https://ptg.opendev.org/ptg.html (PTG Schedule) 18:09:30 <gouthamr> the TC meetings are scheduled 21st Oct: 1400 UTC-1700 UTC and 25th Oct: 1500 UTC to 1700 UTC 18:10:01 <gouthamr> lets dive into this in a little bit 18:10:16 <bauzas> noted, I'll ask the nova community for leading their sessions by someone else 18:10:40 <gmann> do we have onyl leaders interaction session on Monday or more slots? 18:11:03 <gmann> usually Thursday and friday works fine for TC related discusison 18:11:55 <opendevreview> Merged openstack/governance master: Mark kuryr-kubernetes and kuryr-tempest-plugin Inactive https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/929698 18:12:01 <gouthamr> ^ please hold that thought gmann 18:12:07 <gmann> especially friday 17 UTC or 18 UTC slot where more community members can join after finishing their project discussions 18:12:23 <gmann> sure 18:12:24 <gouthamr> that's all the AIs I was tracking; was there anything else being worked on during this past week 18:12:41 <noonedeadpunk> fwiw, I'm traveling Thursday afternoon, but back at evening 18:12:42 <gouthamr> there was one about OSC requiring a new release and a upper-constraint bump 18:13:10 <gmann> there was on AI on me I think for migration to ubuntu noble goal 18:13:34 <gmann> I have created a etherpad and starting working on that 18:13:38 <gmann> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/migrate-to-noble 18:13:53 <gouthamr> ack thank you 18:14:05 <gmann> should be able to prepare the base changes to test by this week and send it on ML 18:14:27 <gouthamr> thanks for adding that to the tracker too! 18:14:33 <gouthamr> ++ 18:15:34 <gouthamr> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-openstackclient/+bug/2080600 (openstack user create fails without --domain option) 18:15:52 <gouthamr> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/930412 ( identity: Don't pass unset options when creating user - stable/2024.2) 18:16:17 <gouthamr> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/931811 (update constraint for python-openstackclient to new release 7.1.3) 18:16:27 <bauzas> ush... 18:16:30 <gouthamr> ^ that's on master though.. 18:16:38 <gouthamr> sry 18:16:40 <gouthamr> scratch that 18:16:42 <gouthamr> 2024.2 18:17:10 <gtema> release change was merged few hours bach 18:17:15 <gmann> yes, master one need release and u-c update but meanwhile fix can be done by passing the domain-id 18:17:20 <gmann> ok 18:17:32 <gmann> I did for greande master 18:17:38 <gmann> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/grenade/+/931057/3 18:17:47 <gmann> but it will be good to have that in u-c also 18:18:16 <gouthamr> great; we have crossed the i's and dotted the t's 18:18:17 <bauzas> so for grenade, what's that mean ? 18:18:36 <gmann> it create users and was not passing domain id 18:18:37 * bauzas opens the grenade change 18:18:44 <gouthamr> in the scripts, if you didn't specify a domain ID, you'd hit that bug 18:19:38 <gmann> gtema: one question, why it was not caught when change introduced the bug ? 18:19:51 <gmann> are we lacking some testing on requirements when u-c was bumped? 18:20:03 <gmann> I think this is change introduced it? 18:20:05 <gmann> #linl https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/909030 18:20:07 <gmann> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/909030 18:20:07 <bauzas> yeah, that's a good question 18:20:10 <gtema> because we are not testing all the weird and wrong usages 18:20:16 <bauzas> I wonder why we didn't found it 18:20:33 <bauzas> we already had a problem with OSC before RC1 18:20:51 <gmann> devstack and grenade job could have caught it easily 18:21:07 <gmann> and requirement gate run tempest-full job 18:21:18 <gmann> not sure why it passed there? 18:21:43 <gmann> sorry tempest-full would not catch it but grenade job and swift job will 18:22:31 <gmann> swift-dsvm-functional was failing on devstack 18:22:50 <gmann> I think we should add grenade job also in requirement gate to test more coverage 18:22:54 <bauzas> but aren't we testing a OSC change by a job that calls the APIs ? 18:23:12 <gmann> bauzas: that would not catch it until it is in u-c 18:23:26 <gmann> unless we are testing it with master? 18:23:36 <bauzas> because tempest doesn't use OSC, right? 18:23:39 <gmann> yeah 18:23:59 <bauzas> ... 18:24:12 <gmann> I think swift-dsvm-functional and adding grenade job should catch osc related things there 18:24:21 <gmann> swift one use the osc 18:24:33 <bauzas> so when we merge a OSC change, we only actually test it once we have a new release.. ouch. 18:25:12 <gmann> I can propose change to increase the coverage in requirements gate 18:25:56 <bauzas> probably but I would prefer to check that by a OSC job 18:25:58 <gouthamr> +1 on adding a grenade job; /me is thinking if we will end up blocking something inadvertently if that job was voting 18:26:36 <bauzas> hopefully by the check pipeline, but a periodic could work 18:26:58 <bauzas> because once OSC releases a version, someone can use it 18:27:09 <gmann> bauzas: osc job might not be testing all these APIs but the osc tests etc can be changed in the same change when backward incompatible change is introduced 18:27:21 <gtema> but you can't also test everything in osc gate 18:27:25 <gmann> yeah 18:27:37 <bauzas> everything for sure 18:27:54 <bauzas> but nova, neutron, cinder ? 18:28:02 <gmann> gouthamr: how about testing upgrade with grenade job? 18:28:20 <bauzas> yeah that'd find it 18:28:27 <gmann> bauzas: ++ and these few projects like we do in requirements and oslo libs 18:28:55 <gmann> their functional jobs should run quickly an catch the things in advance 18:29:42 <bauzas> at least I'd prefer to have a running OSC job before releasing a version 18:29:45 <gmann> for example olso.policy test nova, neutron tox and functional job and we get to know if any breaking things happening 18:30:09 <bauzas> that's why I said we could run periodics if the OSC commnunity can't or doesn't want to have check votes 18:30:29 <bauzas> but before releasing, they would check that periodic 18:30:38 <gmann> a few checks job should not harm even 18:30:53 <bauzas> sure the more the better 18:30:57 <gmann> I can propose changes and we can see how it looks like 18:31:04 <gouthamr> ++ thanks gmann 18:31:16 <gouthamr> alright lets wrap up the AIs with that note; and move on to regular programming 18:31:26 <gouthamr> #topic TC PTG 18:31:54 <bauzas> gmann++ agreed 18:32:12 <gouthamr> noonedeadpunk: noted your absence on Thursday.. but, i did mean to have TC sessions only on Mon, Fri - not an executive decision.. was just following a pattern from the past few PTGs 18:32:28 <noonedeadpunk> ++ 18:32:47 <gouthamr> on Monday; however, i reserved more time because i think it'd be helpful to have project contributors join us on the goal topics on the etherpad 18:33:11 <bauzas> yup and, 18:33:16 <gmann> gouthamr: note we do have other support team sessions on Modnay and people may want to join there 18:34:03 <gmann> QA usually book on Monday and try to finish it before members join other project related discussion on other days 18:34:11 <bauzas> for example if we discuss about the translation topic in Monday, projects could also engage that within their own PTG times after 18:34:13 <gouthamr> gmann: i didn't see any yet.. probably still planning? 18:34:14 <spotz[m]> The problem is no one has signed up on the schedule yet 18:34:20 <gouthamr> ^ YES 18:34:21 <gmann> gouthamr: yes 18:34:39 <gmann> I will check with martin on that 18:34:46 <spotz[m]> I will miss part of Monday but will pop in and out 18:34:50 <bauzas> I like the idea of a TC starting cross-project topics at the beginning of the PTG and eventually concluding at the end 18:34:54 <gmann> but why we do not book Friday evening slot for TC? 18:35:11 <gouthamr> sigh; okay.. we'll try to be dynamic about this.. maybe we don't need 3 hours on Monday.. we could do with 2 18:35:18 <gouthamr> gmann: it is? 18:35:19 <gmann> that was most attended slots in past 18:35:28 <gouthamr> ohh, you mean the very last slot 18:35:47 <gmann> yeah, maybe 2 hrs or 3 hrs the last slots on friday 18:36:14 <bauzas> I'd like to see some topics engaged on Monday, 2 hours can be a stretch goal but I'd prefer to keep the 3rd hour booked 18:36:15 <gmann> when community members finish project related things and can join TC one 18:36:57 <gmann> in that case, maybe we can shift Thursday one to Friday? 18:37:01 <gouthamr> hmmm, 1700 UTC; past beer-o-clock in EU and APAC, and nearly next day far east 18:37:05 <fungi> some of it stems from in-person ptgs where lots of people were already leaving to catch their flights on friday afternoons, but still possible some people are dropping out to start other weekend activities (especially in europe, and in asia it's already saturday at that point). personally, i have some outside obligations on that friday and won't be arounbd 18:37:12 <gmann> bauzas: sure 18:37:47 <bauzas> the Friday slots will impact my personal activities, for sure, but that's only once per semester 18:37:53 <gmann> you mean friday last slots are not recommened to book? 18:38:22 <spotz[m]> If we were in person sure, but you're more likely to take a Friday off then most other days 18:38:46 <gmann> for virtual i mean, there is no in person PTG now 18:38:56 <spotz[m]> And we run into it's evening for EMEA and Saturday for APAC as mentioned 18:39:02 <bauzas> trust me, virtual PTGs are very in-person for me :) 18:39:28 <bauzas> the only difference is that I'm alone in my room 18:39:43 <gmann> :) 18:40:14 <bauzas> didn't we had those usual timeslots in the past ? 18:40:22 <bauzas> I'm fine with keeping me, I was prepared :) 18:40:29 <bauzas> keeping them* 18:41:00 <slaweq> yeah, we had usually Monday for TC & community leaders session and then Thursday and Friday for TC discussion 18:41:05 <bauzas> but we may require some asia friendly timeslot in order to balance 18:41:06 <gmann> yeah 18:41:13 <slaweq> it was up to around 18 or 19 utc IIRC 18:41:30 <bauzas> if you want MHO, 18:41:43 <bauzas> booking a slot doesn't mean we need to use it fo the whole time 18:41:49 <fungi> (noting it's almost 19 utc now) 18:42:14 <gouthamr> true ^ but, if we moved this meeting to friday, how many of us would be happy to join in? 18:42:17 <gmann> asia friendly slots is good idea but even 13 UTC is not asia friendly right? 18:42:18 <bauzas> I'm used to book 16 hours every cycle which I usually take, but we had occurences in the past of finishing earlier, and this was fine 18:42:38 <gmann> gouthamr: weekly meetings vs PTG are different things. 18:42:40 <slaweq> gouthamr I wouldn't be happy but I would join :) 18:42:58 <bauzas> gouthamr: a weekly meeting is different from a once-semesterly (is it the right term) meeting ? 18:43:07 <bauzas> gmann: that. 18:43:49 <bauzas> I'm OK with running late on a Friday evening once, I'm not okay with throwing *all* my Friday evening activities the whole 6 months 18:44:06 <gmann> we do not need to book 18 or 19 UTC on friday even 15-17 UTC 2 hrs should be good 18:44:26 <slaweq> bauzas yes, the same for me, once in 6 months I can definitely do it 18:44:34 <spotz[m]> Yeah but a weekly on Friday isn't the most productive as at any given time 1-3 people would be off 18:44:35 <gmann> even I like the 18-19 UTC one which has been productive in past but anyways 18:44:50 <bauzas> did we got updates from ian choi and sungsoo about their topics ? 18:45:10 <slaweq> but if we want to have some time slots more Asia friendly, then I guess it will be somewhere in the middle of night for Europe 18:45:12 <bauzas> given the productive Korea summit, I just want to make sure we leave room for them 18:45:24 <gouthamr> gmann: 1300 UTC is 9pm in Beijing/Manila/Perth, 10pm in Tokyo, 12am in Sydney -- not exactly "friendly"; but 0400-0800 would be hard for EU and west asia folks 18:45:59 <gmann> gouthamr: there is no time we can accommodate all these TZ :) 18:45:59 <bauzas> if that's once *and* productive, I can manage my sleep miss 18:46:28 <bauzas> let's run a physical PTG ! 18:46:30 <slaweq> gouthamr personally I can do it also in such weird time slots if needed, it is just once in 6 months and I would feel more like on in-person PTG, with jetlag :D 18:46:37 <gmann> maybe we can open alternate slot for them but finding slot which is ok for all these TZ is not possible 18:47:27 <gmann> friday 15-17 UTC can be good one and not very late ? 18:47:29 <bauzas> (I should say a physical-in-the-same-room-term PTG 18:48:03 <bauzas> gmann: as I said, I'll just need to find someone to chair the nova sessions but I'm cool with the current proposal 18:48:21 <gouthamr> ack; from what i'm reading, i'd throw in the session times with the existing time slots, and have some wiggle room for cross project discussions on Monday outside the TC room 18:48:38 <gouthamr> we can do one final check next week; and move things around 18:48:43 <bauzas> ++ 18:48:47 <gouthamr> does that make sense? short notice, but, we're used to that 18:48:55 <gmann> ++ 18:50:13 <gouthamr> alright anything else about the PTG? 18:50:21 <spotz[m]> And maybe an email to the list of what we're planning though maybe that's why no one scheduled Monday in anticipation 18:50:44 <gmann> usually teams are late to book 18:50:48 <gouthamr> ^ yes will update my thread stating there are now time slots 18:50:58 <gouthamr> (when they're there) 18:51:36 <cardoe> I need to book something for a neutron/ironic cross session 18:52:21 <gouthamr> #topic A check on gate health 18:52:23 <gouthamr> we 18:52:32 <gouthamr> are 8 mins away from close 18:52:49 <gouthamr> and i'd like to keep a few for Open Discussion 18:52:54 <gmann> greande jobs is not yet ready to upgrade from stable/2024.2 to current master 18:53:00 <gmann> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/grenade/+/930507/8 18:53:01 <clarkb> opendev is going to update the default ansible version to 9 in the openstack tenant (and all other tenants) today 18:53:11 <clarkb> *in the openstack zuul tenant 18:53:13 <gmann> some setuptool error is happening in multinode jobs 18:53:31 <gmann> #link https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/517b21fc57d6480f902273e58f9032b5/log/compute1/logs/old/devstacklog.txt#5046 18:53:44 <gmann> anyone aware of these? 18:53:46 <gmann> clarkb: fungi ^^ 18:54:25 <clarkb> gmann: looks like it is trying to do an editable install and that is failing. Did openstack stop doing editable installs elsewhere or maybe found some other workaround? 18:54:37 <fungi> that error doesn't look familiar at least 18:55:15 <fungi> but there were semi-recent (in the past 1-2 years) changes to how editable installs are handled by setuptools for pyproject standardization 18:55:34 <gmann> not sure, it only happen in multinode job and when it install devstack on stable/2024.2 (as old node in greande) 18:55:46 <fungi> the changes i'm familiar with only kick in when the package has a pyproject.toml file though 18:56:25 <clarkb> fungi: it is using build_meta stuff which I think implies pyproject.toml? 18:56:26 <gmann> ok, maybe something in nova side in stable/2024.2 18:56:48 <clarkb> I don't see any obvious changes in devstack/inc/python explaining why it generally works but doesn't with grenade 18:57:33 <gmann> but we should have some multinode job there which were passing, it started failing when greande testing it from stable/2024.2 18:58:39 <fungi> nova added a pyproject.toml file in commit 8464abe56ccbbf09f768df47707d2ff2c4c7b264 which appears in tags 30.0.0.0rc1 and 30.0.0 18:58:43 <fungi> not sure if that could explain it 18:58:55 <gmann> maybe, I was checking the same. thanks 18:59:05 <gouthamr> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/899753 18:59:13 <gouthamr> same thing on gerrit ^ 18:59:13 <fungi> it definitely appears in the stable/2024.2 branch though 18:59:14 <gmann> anyways I will check and discuss with you after meeting or so 18:59:20 <gmann> fungi: yeah 18:59:32 <gmann> fungi: let me test that 19:00:23 <fungi> how editable installs work with setuptools definitely changes depending on whether the project has a pyproject.toml file though, yes 19:00:41 <gmann> k 19:00:56 <gouthamr> alright we're at the hour 19:01:04 <gouthamr> and we're out of time for Open Discussion 19:01:30 <gouthamr> we'll try to slot this better in future meetings.. 19:01:43 <gouthamr> but, please chat away after we end this meeting 19:01:50 <gouthamr> thank you all for attending 19:01:56 <gouthamr> #endmeeting