| *** ysandeep|out is now known as ysandeep | 05:14 | |
| *** brinzhang_ is now known as brinzhang | 07:44 | |
| *** akekane_ is now known as abhishekk | 07:52 | |
| *** amoralej|off is now known as amoralej | 08:10 | |
| opendevreview | Michal Nasiadka proposed openstack/releases master: Release Yoga RC3 for Kolla and Kolla-Ansible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818353 | 08:38 |
|---|---|---|
| *** ysandeep is now known as ysandeep|afk | 11:04 | |
| opendevreview | Riccardo Pittau proposed openstack/releases master: Release ironic-lib 5.0.1 for xena https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818538 | 11:47 |
| opendevreview | Riccardo Pittau proposed openstack/releases master: Release ironic-lib 4.6.3 for wallaby https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818539 | 11:48 |
| *** ysandeep|afk is now known as ysandeep | 12:22 | |
| *** amoralej is now known as amoralej|lunch | 13:24 | |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/releases master: Release Yoga RC3 for Kolla and Kolla-Ansible https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818353 | 13:49 |
| elodilles | reminder: meeting in a couple of mins | 13:54 |
| elodilles | (Shouldn't that be Xena RC3? ^^^) | 13:54 |
| elodilles | ok, let's start | 14:01 |
| elodilles | #startmeeting releaseteam | 14:01 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Fri Nov 19 14:01:14 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is elodilles. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:01 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:01 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam' | 14:01 |
| ttx | o/ | 14:01 |
| hberaud | o/ | 14:01 |
| elodilles | hi o/ | 14:01 |
| elodilles | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/yoga-relmgt-tracking | 14:01 |
| elodilles | we are at line 73 | 14:01 |
| elodilles | let's start with the 1st topic | 14:02 |
| elodilles | #topic Review task completion | 14:02 |
| elodilles | #info Ensure that all trailing projects have been branched for the previous series | 14:02 |
| elodilles | that was on me | 14:02 |
| elodilles | I've proposed the patches, I hope i did it right | 14:03 |
| elodilles | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:trailing-xena | 14:03 |
| elodilles | these are the patches ^^^ | 14:03 |
| ttx | IIRC our deadline is pretty fuzzy on those, at least the patches will start the discussion | 14:04 |
| hberaud | +1 | 14:04 |
| elodilles | yes, the trailing delivery deadline is December 16th | 14:04 |
| elodilles | so we are one month ahead of that | 14:05 |
| elodilles | ok, if nothing else for this then i'll continue with the next task | 14:05 |
| elodilles | #info Propose autoreleases for cycle-with-intermediary libraries which did not release since the previous release | 14:06 |
| elodilles | i've generated the patches a bit late for this, instead of beginning of week, i created those yesterday afternoon | 14:07 |
| elodilles | #link https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:yoga-milestone-1 | 14:07 |
| ttx | ok so we might give them a bit more time before force-approving those without -1 | 14:08 |
| ttx | (in theory we would have done that now) | 14:08 |
| ttx | (and give those with -1 a few extra days) | 14:08 |
| elodilles | note: there were quite many that were listed as not released yet, but either didn't have any change at all or just CI/tests/branch setup releated patches were merged | 14:08 |
| ttx | yeah those can be ignored | 14:08 |
| hberaud | the automaton patch can be abandonned | 14:09 |
| hberaud | I left a comment | 14:09 |
| elodilles | ttx: yes, thanks, let's give some time until the force-approve | 14:09 |
| hberaud | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818403 | 14:09 |
| elodilles | hberaud: looking | 14:09 |
| elodilles | hberaud: thanks, abandoned! | 14:11 |
| hberaud | ty | 14:11 |
| elodilles | do we want to agree on a force-approval deadline, like Tuesday, or something? | 14:12 |
| ttx | I'd say approve all without -1s by Tuesday, then finalize those with -1s by end of week | 14:13 |
| hberaud | Wednesday, seems more appropriate | 14:13 |
| hberaud | or the end of week | 14:13 |
| ttx | I don;t want to delay too much | 14:13 |
| ttx | basically push by two business days | 14:14 |
| hberaud | wfm | 14:14 |
| elodilles | ok | 14:14 |
| elodilles | #agreed yoga-milestone-1 patches: approve all without -1s by Tuesday, then finalize those with -1s by end of week | 14:15 |
| *** amoralej|lunch is now known as amoralej | 14:15 | |
| elodilles | ok, next topic | 14:15 |
| elodilles | #info To catch if there are acl issues in newly created repositories | 14:15 |
| elodilles | ttx: this was yours | 14:15 |
| ttx | yep, the script revealed one gap | 14:16 |
| ttx | https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/818356 (tap-as-a-service) | 14:16 |
| ttx | (basically the idea is to make sure releases go through openstack/releases, so remove direct tagging rights | 14:16 |
| ttx | ) | 14:17 |
| ttx | nothing more to say | 14:17 |
| elodilles | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/818356 | 14:17 |
| elodilles | ttx: cool, thanks! | 14:17 |
| elodilles | for the explanation, too | 14:17 |
| elodilles | ok. the countdown email is not yet ready, as I'll send it after the meeting and when we are there :) | 14:18 |
| elodilles | so next topic | 14:18 |
| fungi | on a related note, was there ever a formal conclusion as to whether the release team can handle sigs' repos? | 14:18 |
| elodilles | #topic Assign R-18 tasks | 14:18 |
| elodilles | fungi: i don't know. hberaud , ttx , do you remember such? | 14:20 |
| hberaud | nope | 14:20 |
| ttx | We only do openstack release | 14:20 |
| ttx | i.e. deliverables from project teams | 14:20 |
| ttx | that's they key difference between project teams and sigs | 14:21 |
| hberaud | Agreed with ttx | 14:21 |
| ttx | so we tend to explictly stay away from SIG repos | 14:21 |
| fungi | okay, i recall it came up on the ml last week, i thought it was ansible-collections-openstack but might have been somthing else | 14:21 |
| ttx | that's why QA is still a project team | 14:21 |
| ttx | (and with release management the onlt horizontal team left) | 14:22 |
| ttx | it's because their repos are handled by us as part of "the release" | 14:22 |
| fungi | oh, i see where i got confused | 14:23 |
| ttx | (+ requirements) | 14:23 |
| fungi | elodilles posted on openstack-discuss about a release job failure for ansible-collections-openstack but that was one they tagged themselves i guess | 14:23 |
| ttx | (I tried to clean things up over the years and I think we finally got there) | 14:23 |
| ttx | yes release jobs failure can be triggered by openstack/releases or direct tags :) | 14:24 |
| elodilles | yes, and since it was not familiar to me i rather forwarded it to ML o:) | 14:25 |
| fungi | yeah, he mis-attributed it to the ansible team in the e-mail, but that was it | 14:25 |
| fungi | i thought maybe it was one which had been handled via openstack/releases but looks like it wasn't | 14:25 |
| fungi | confusion cleared, thanks | 14:25 |
| ttx | the only way to be sure bnothing falls into the cracks is really to have a finite, defined list of things we handle | 14:26 |
| ttx | otherwise you're just never sure | 14:26 |
| fungi | yes, i agree | 14:26 |
| elodilles | yepp, that's for sure | 14:26 |
| ttx | it's been tricky enough to compile that list (see release-management key in projects.yaml) | 14:26 |
| ttx | there were exceptions all over the map :) | 14:27 |
| ttx | but we are pretty good now... just need to periodically check all data is aligned | 14:27 |
| ttx | like that ACL check we did this week | 14:27 |
| fungi | makes sense, that's what reminded me | 14:27 |
| elodilles | ok, so, next topic: assigning R-18 tasks | 14:28 |
| elodilles | there is only 1 task | 14:29 |
| elodilles | i guess this could be "all", right? o:) | 14:29 |
| hberaud | yes | 14:29 |
| elodilles | "Review any remaining milestone-1 exceptions" | 14:29 |
| elodilles | added "all" to that then. thanks | 14:30 |
| elodilles | next topic: | 14:30 |
| elodilles | #topic Review countdown email contents | 14:30 |
| elodilles | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/relmgmt-weekly-emails | 14:30 |
| elodilles | i've added and edited the mail ^^^ | 14:31 |
| elodilles | there is one thing: we don't have release cycle goal (page) | 14:31 |
| ttx | It's hard to say we are past Yoga-1 | 14:32 |
| elodilles | so I'll remove that if you confirm that is OK | 14:32 |
| ttx | I'd wait until next week to send this one | 14:32 |
| ttx | Like wait until we process things on tuesday | 14:32 |
| elodilles | ttx: hmm, yes, since the shifted deadline to Tuesday | 14:32 |
| elodilles | ttx: that works for me | 14:33 |
| hberaud | WFM | 14:33 |
| ttx | otherwise looks good! | 14:33 |
| elodilles | ok, thanks | 14:33 |
| hberaud | +1 | 14:33 |
| elodilles | #action to elod: Send countdown mail on Tuesday, after Yoga-1 milestone patches have been merged | 14:34 |
| elodilles | (hope i remember correctly for the keywords :)) | 14:34 |
| elodilles | anyway | 14:34 |
| elodilles | next topic then | 14:34 |
| elodilles | #topic Branches without releases https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818445 | 14:35 |
| ttx | yeah I was wondering about that one | 14:35 |
| ttx | I think we only branch on release points, on purpose | 14:36 |
| elodilles | openstack-ansible-roles have similar branching, i mean, without any release, | 14:37 |
| elodilles | just the hashes, set as location | 14:37 |
| ttx | the error looks more like a bug than a validation rule failure | 14:37 |
| ttx | latest_release = deliv.releases[-1] | 14:37 |
| ttx | IndexError: list index out of range | 14:37 |
| hberaud | the openstack-ansible-role is tagless | 14:38 |
| hberaud | https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/wallaby/openstack-ansible-roles.yaml#L3 | 14:38 |
| elodilles | hberaud: you are right | 14:38 |
| hberaud | the tripleo-docs is a cwi deliverable | 14:38 |
| hberaud | this is why it complain with it | 14:38 |
| hberaud | I don't think this is possible to branch without releasing something | 14:39 |
| hberaud | (in the tripleo-docs context) | 14:40 |
| ttx | at the very minimum we should catch that case because currently the script just errors out | 14:40 |
| hberaud | indeed | 14:40 |
| ttx | but yes, the error matches | 14:40 |
| ttx | "stable branches must be created from the latest tagged release..." | 14:41 |
| ttx | here the script errors out trying to grab the latest release | 14:41 |
| ttx | but there is none | 14:41 |
| ttx | If it was tagless it would pass | 14:42 |
| hberaud | yes | 14:42 |
| ttx | or "upstream" | 14:42 |
| elodilles | on the other hand do we want to allow this late branch cutting (for wallaby, in this case)? | 14:42 |
| hberaud | it can't hurt | 14:42 |
| elodilles | ok | 14:42 |
| ttx | ok, who replies? | 14:43 |
| hberaud | this is a trailing deliverable | 14:43 |
| hberaud | this is why we missed to branch it | 14:43 |
| elodilles | i see | 14:43 |
| hberaud | it went under our radar | 14:44 |
| elodilles | ok, so I can comment on the patch that this requires a release as well. <- is this OK? | 14:45 |
| ttx | wfm | 14:45 |
| hberaud | wfm | 14:46 |
| elodilles | good. and another thing is the validation, it could be fixed with some clear error message then, i guess | 14:47 |
| elodilles | i'll try to look into it. of course, if someone has an idea for how to fix, then please propose a patch for that :) | 14:49 |
| elodilles | ok, next topic | 14:49 |
| elodilles | #topic Proposing skipping meeting next week (just need to make sure we process all yoga-1) | 14:49 |
| ttx | I won;t be around anyway, but there is also no task the week after | 14:50 |
| hberaud | wfm | 14:50 |
| ttx | trick is we still need to doublecheck that all yoga-1 is handled | 14:50 |
| elodilles | yes, I mean, now we'll have the yoga-milestone-1 patches, but that can be handled without the meeting :) | 14:51 |
| ttx | ++ | 14:52 |
| elodilles | ok | 14:52 |
| elodilles | i've added a note to meeting agenda after (skip + make sure everything is good with yoga-milestone-1) | 14:54 |
| elodilles | s/after// | 14:54 |
| elodilles | last topic: | 14:54 |
| elodilles | #topic Open Discussion | 14:54 |
| elodilles | anything to mention? anyone? | 14:55 |
| ttx | nope | 14:55 |
| fungi | nothing here | 14:56 |
| elodilles | okay, then thanks everyone, let's close the meeting | 14:57 |
| elodilles | #endmeeting | 14:57 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Fri Nov 19 14:57:22 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 14:57 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2021/releaseteam.2021-11-19-14.01.html | 14:57 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2021/releaseteam.2021-11-19-14.01.txt | 14:57 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/releaseteam/2021/releaseteam.2021-11-19-14.01.log.html | 14:57 |
| hberaud | nope | 14:57 |
| hberaud | elodilles: thanks | 14:57 |
| elodilles | thanks, too o/ | 14:57 |
| *** ysandeep is now known as ysandeep|out | 15:13 | |
| opendevreview | Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/releases master: Fix validation when tags are missing and a branch is requested https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818562 | 15:17 |
| hberaud | ttx, elodilles: here is a fix ^ to handle the problem with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818445 | 15:18 |
| elodilles | hberaud: thanks \o/ will review shortly | 15:19 |
| hberaud | I just have some concern concerning about where we need to handle the 'ValueError' | 15:20 |
| opendevreview | Hervé Beraud proposed openstack/releases master: Fix validation when tags are missing and a branch is requested https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/818562 | 15:30 |
| opendevreview | Elod Illes proposed openstack/releases master: [manila] Transition Ussuri to EM https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/817599 | 16:12 |
| opendevreview | Merged openstack/releases master: [nova] Transition Ussuri to EM https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/817606 | 16:16 |
| *** marios is now known as marios|out | 16:47 | |
| clarkb | Hello release team. The latest PBR release 5.8.0 should make it possible for PBR users to use modern python packaging tooling specifications via pyproject.toml | 16:55 |
| clarkb | https://review.opendev.org/c/opendev/bindep/+/816741 was my test change and we found some issues there with 5.7.0 though those issues only arise if you try to do non backward compatible usage without setup_requires | 16:55 |
| clarkb | I don't know what the correct choices for openstack packaging will, but wanted to mention that this seems viable now should you want to go that route. One thing worth noting is that you can specify the version of setuptools you want if you use this tooling. Doing this has come up in the past as somethign that might be desireable | 16:56 |
| *** amoralej is now known as amoralej|off | 17:29 | |
| *** whoami-rajat__ is now known as whoami-rajat | 17:42 | |
| elodilles | clarkb: thanks for the info! i am not fully familiar with this pyproject.toml yet, but the setuptools pinning looks good :) | 19:06 |
| clarkb | elodilles: note I would still use it sparingly as I'm not sure how it would interfere with things like distro packaging if setuptools is outside the expected range. But at least it becomes a possibility | 19:07 |
| elodilles | hmmm, i see, good point | 19:09 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!