)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":11975,"name":"Slawek Kaplonski","email":"skaplons@redhat.com","username":"slaweq"},"change_message_id":"7427d70cf5eba900f39f20780cb2291a0043040d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"efe20a0b_799051ab","updated":"2022-01-12 08:21:35.000000000","message":"-1 just to get visibility to my question. If that will be fine to bump requirement, I\u0027m ok with the other parts of the patch.","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":21798,"name":"Bernard Cafarelli","email":"bcafarel@redhat.com","username":"bcafarel"},"change_message_id":"5614328995fdae340c13165edb91a49fccd68231","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"7da03299_a7ea8606","updated":"2022-01-12 10:18:23.000000000","message":"I have the same opinion as slaweq, adding stable core group for confirmation","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"583654e2146e2d7b75e4f35f8af62e6d2fd6fab8","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"76cb3cc3_86ff6b44","updated":"2022-01-13 15:26:01.000000000","message":"hi, this is where the requirements change is described for stable maintenance:\n\nhttps://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#stable-branch-maintenance\n\nIt says: \"Raising effective minimums is only acceptable during Phase I, and only due to security issues.\"\nThis is a bit old description, haven\u0027t been changed when the phases were changed during the Extended Maintenance process introduction (\"Phase I\" meant \"Maintained\" so within 6 month after the release).\n\nFor upper constraints it says: \"In stable branches, we usually only update constraints for projects managed within the OpenStack community. Exceptions are made for other projects when there are gate issues.\"\n\nSo in this respect, I would say what we usually say: best is to avoid dependency (minimum constraints in this case) changes, though, if the team is confident enough that it won\u0027t cause breakage for end users / vendors (for example all the supported distros have higher version of the given package that the actual lower constraints contains), then there can be exceptions in my understanding.\n\nIn this particular case we are talking about an openstack managed package (oslo.utils), on the other hand it does not solve a gate issue. So in short: there can be exceptions, but it must be considered, and best is to avoid (to keep stable branches really stable).","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"ff2290c14c6773a9f42b35c3828e31c094602238","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"a850135b_12f61c4d","updated":"2022-01-11 10:32:29.000000000","message":"stable/xena u-c for oslo.utils is 4.10.0[1], so i think requirements.txt update should be fine in this case.\n\n[1] https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/4e8983fc1ad9d96202791ec7ab93128191061926/upper-constraints.txt#L580","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"5ba26e0d780585f225fa4eed13ece3ab8d12d9c4","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"a24fc0ea_464eea82","in_reply_to":"76cb3cc3_86ff6b44","updated":"2022-01-17 14:11:25.000000000","message":"Thanks Elod for all the details.\n\nWrt Raising minimum version it seems it\u0027s talking only about global requirements[1] not project specific minimum requirements. Can you please cross check if it\u0027s same policy for updating requirements.txt in projects and global-requirements.txt in openstack/requirements? Shouldn\u0027t be same as global-requirement is more generic/shared across all OpenStack projects, every project requirements.txt should just not conflict with global-requirements.txt.\n\nAlso reading again[2] mentions to bump minimum in requirements.txt after updating upper-constraints.txt in openstack/requirements if it\u0027s not already contains required version. This makes sense as without it updates will not work as most jobs use upper-constraints. This doesn\u0027t specify anything related to stable but again [3] mentions that for OpenStack libraries updates are allowed in u-c for stable releases. Exception needed only for non-openstack libraries.\n\nYeap i got the idea of avoiding bumps in stable to keep the projects stable, but just not clear about the policies across projects. As i see nova/cinder already have bumped oslo.utils same as the proposed here in both wallaby and xena. So wrt availability of required versions for end users/vendors it seems those already have required version of oslo-utils to support wallaby/xena nova and cinder and may be some other projects as well.\n\nI can modify this patch without updating oslo.utils minimum version but wanted to take this opportunity to clarify the raised issue on the policy here.\n\n[1] https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/stable/xena/global-requirements.txt#L165\n[2] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#updating-the-minimum-version-of-a-dependency\n[3] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#upper-constraints","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"1ccad377a993d26e3beb75f54019cc0e776068f5","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"d454ca2d_6411331f","in_reply_to":"a24fc0ea_464eea82","updated":"2022-01-17 17:35:09.000000000","message":"\u003e Thanks Elod for all the details.\n\u003e \n\u003e Wrt Raising minimum version it seems it\u0027s talking only about global requirements[1] not project specific minimum requirements. Can you please cross check if it\u0027s same policy for updating requirements.txt in projects and global-requirements.txt in openstack/requirements? Shouldn\u0027t be same as global-requirement is more generic/shared across all OpenStack projects, every project requirements.txt should just not conflict with global-requirements.txt.\n\nglobal-requirements.txt does not contain lower constraints in general (only at python version differentiation), which means, when the doc talks about minimums, then it must be about project specific requirements.txt, in my understanding.\n\n\"Raising effective minimums is only acceptable during Phase I, and only due to security issues.\"\n\n\u003e \n\u003e Also reading again[2] mentions to bump minimum in requirements.txt after updating upper-constraints.txt in openstack/requirements if it\u0027s not already contains required version. This makes sense as without it updates will not work as most jobs use upper-constraints. This doesn\u0027t specify anything related to stable but again [3] mentions that for OpenStack libraries updates are allowed in u-c for stable releases. Exception needed only for non-openstack libraries.\n\u003e \n\u003e Yeap i got the idea of avoiding bumps in stable to keep the projects stable, but just not clear about the policies across projects. As i see nova/cinder already have bumped oslo.utils same as the proposed here in both wallaby and xena. So wrt availability of required versions for end users/vendors it seems those already have required version of oslo-utils to support wallaby/xena nova and cinder and may be some other projects as well.\n\nBoth nova and cinder modified oslo.utils minimum version for their rc1/rc2, so the change were part of their original final Wallaby release.\n\nAnyway, I can agree that part, that nova and cinder have oslo.utils 4.8.0 as their minimum requirements in stable/wallaby, so it might not hurt end users if we bump it in neutron as well, but correct me if i\u0027m wrong. Also in this sense, distros probably have at least 4.8.0 due to they need that anyway for nova and cinder, which means it\u0027s probably less problematic from distros perspective as well.\n\n(Nevertheless, if anyone is aware of such cases where merging this patch would break things then this fix should not be backported)\n\nHope this all make some sense and helps a bit.\n\n\u003e \n\u003e I can modify this patch without updating oslo.utils minimum version but wanted to take this opportunity to clarify the raised issue on the policy here.\n\u003e \n\u003e [1] https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/stable/xena/global-requirements.txt#L165\n\u003e [2] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#updating-the-minimum-version-of-a-dependency\n\u003e [3] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#upper-constraints","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"0eb599ea15b2d3899da321179fe5049852a639be","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"0c066c36_7deda007","in_reply_to":"a850135b_12f61c4d","updated":"2022-01-11 10:35:01.000000000","message":"You can backport this patch up to Wallaby (without hitting the limit in upper-constraints).","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"615e19ff07a906f673a5df47a2ba96f7ff1b0f96","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"99e9d404_4fea118f","in_reply_to":"d454ca2d_6411331f","updated":"2022-01-18 08:37:00.000000000","message":"Thanks a lot Elod.\n\nYes bumping oslo-utils is safer for this case as already done by some other projects, but it\u0027s not always possible to check how it\u0027s being done by other projects and how it\u0027s handled in all the supported distro\u0027s for stable releases. \n\nConsidering opinions from other neutron cores it\u0027s better and safer to have strict policy for Neutron stable releases.\n\nThanks everyone for the opinions, /me will update the patch such that it do not require oslo.utils bump.","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":8313,"name":"Lajos Katona","display_name":"lajoskatona","email":"katonalala@gmail.com","username":"elajkat","status":"Ericsson Software Technology"},"change_message_id":"adb459a1782755b0e4dce17eff825853b4d742a9","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"11369860_6594a26f","updated":"2022-01-24 14:38:10.000000000","message":"Thanks for the work and consideration","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"},{"author":{"_account_id":11975,"name":"Slawek Kaplonski","email":"skaplons@redhat.com","username":"slaweq"},"change_message_id":"2bb132b98a3d3235b8a2858f1368f903d4babbff","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"9c22d2fd_b331bec1","updated":"2022-01-24 16:27:44.000000000","message":"Thx. Now without changing requirements it looks good for me","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"eac24d91f475b3643ef4eef7cf6045371aa92890","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"0c1850f2_11592a0a","updated":"2022-01-25 05:34:31.000000000","message":"multinode-ovs failed, looks some real issue as multiple failures https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name\u003dneutron-ovs-tempest-multinode-full\u0026project\u003dopenstack%2Fneutron\u0026branch\u003dstable%2Fxena\u0026skip\u003d0","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"},{"author":{"_account_id":11975,"name":"Slawek Kaplonski","email":"skaplons@redhat.com","username":"slaweq"},"change_message_id":"b9c88a539ac19a7ec388384ed46eb1643e03f3cb","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"4d543782_77f4b760","updated":"2022-01-25 07:36:37.000000000","message":"recheck","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"55923c2f036c536bbceaead1fcd9d5a05704cc74","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"11043444_a56ebf75","updated":"2022-01-25 11:23:51.000000000","message":"recheck multinode-ovs fix merged https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/817529","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"377bd7d9bae209ab13500211a1732b1b91551e95","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"4b8bf3ad_bea9a4a2","in_reply_to":"0c1850f2_11592a0a","updated":"2022-01-25 05:50:45.000000000","message":"Ok found https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1943724, and seems https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/817529 will fix it, just rebased let\u0027s see how it goes.","commit_id":"88dfbcc8a943332d6dbe2c0bcb310661908ad1e2"}],"requirements.txt":[{"author":{"_account_id":11975,"name":"Slawek Kaplonski","email":"skaplons@redhat.com","username":"slaweq"},"change_message_id":"7427d70cf5eba900f39f20780cb2291a0043040d","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"e0dab0d7_4e153a65","line":43,"updated":"2022-01-12 08:21:35.000000000","message":"question to other stable cores: is it ok to bump requirements in the stable branch? I\u0027m asking because for example Neutron package in RDO has got:\n\n    Requires:       python3-oslo-utils \u003e\u003d 4.5.0\n\nSee: https://review.rdoproject.org/cgit/openstack/neutron-distgit/tree/openstack-neutron.spec?h\u003dxena-rdo#n184","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"c997aee75f9c2b6ef4c1deba6033891fb04711fc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"53ca3b95_609fdf24","line":43,"in_reply_to":"0a73710f_392191ed","updated":"2022-01-13 08:48:48.000000000","message":"Added topic to tomorrow\u0027s releaseteam meeting agenda https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/yoga-relmgt-tracking#L197\n\nI will be out tomorrow but i think it will be followed back.","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":8313,"name":"Lajos Katona","display_name":"lajoskatona","email":"katonalala@gmail.com","username":"elajkat","status":"Ericsson Software Technology"},"change_message_id":"524dd19e1067e7c804d496f7a2d0c3bcbcb5f900","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"217e97ca_9bc75105","line":43,"in_reply_to":"2060c666_daa4d13e","updated":"2022-01-12 15:31:53.000000000","message":"I can\u0027t see specific line for req bump in stable backports:\nhttps://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#review-guidelines\n\nPerhaps here: https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#active-maintenance:\n\"Following the Review guidelines. Specifically, not allowing backports of new features, new dependencies, or backward incompatible changes.\"\n\nthough it looks fishy.","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"6fcba5a47e7537d46cf73297fda3cd6638f8b2cd","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"0a73710f_392191ed","line":43,"in_reply_to":"217e97ca_9bc75105","updated":"2022-01-13 08:16:25.000000000","message":"I too can\u0027t find anything specific related to this, but yes it would be good to get clearity from stable maintenance core team, this will be helpful in future patches.\n\nI am all ok to modify the patch without requirement bump, would need some adjustment though. Will modify once have more clearity.","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":21798,"name":"Bernard Cafarelli","email":"bcafarel@redhat.com","username":"bcafarel"},"change_message_id":"5614328995fdae340c13165edb91a49fccd68231","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"2060c666_daa4d13e","line":43,"in_reply_to":"42a0a510_c07aecca","updated":"2022-01-12 10:18:23.000000000","message":"At the very least the backport would need an upgrade section in release note, if users running a Xena cloud with oslo.utils 4.5.0 upgrade neutron alone, that would break it for them.\n\nI remember we avoided such a requirements change on ovsdbapp by also backporting the relevant bits in neutron, is it possible here?\n\nOverall, I think we should not change requirements in stable branch, we can check with  stable maintenance core team","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"},{"author":{"_account_id":13861,"name":"yatin","email":"ykarel@redhat.com","username":"yatinkarel"},"change_message_id":"e1f5fd129f50fa0ee0e0bc81452126bf7ea48773","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"oslo.serialization\u003e\u003d2.25.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":"oslo.service\u003e\u003d1.31.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":42,"context_line":"oslo.upgradecheck\u003e\u003d1.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"oslo.utils\u003e\u003d4.8.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"oslo.versionedobjects\u003e\u003d1.35.1 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":45,"context_line":"osprofiler\u003e\u003d2.3.0 # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"os-ken\u003e\u003d2.0.0 # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"42a0a510_c07aecca","line":43,"in_reply_to":"e0dab0d7_4e153a65","updated":"2022-01-12 09:33:13.000000000","message":"Answering just from RDO perspective, RDO too follows upper-constraints for libraries, hence xena currently have 4.10.0 as xena-uc[1]. And wrt updates in spec, that follows requirements.txt, so once this patch merges will propose a patch in RDO to get that updated same as requirements.txt, this will take care both initial deploy and upgrade scenarios.\n\n\n[1] https://trunk.rdoproject.org/centos8-xena/component/common/current-tripleo/python-oslo-utils-4.10.0-0.20210906171309.2c74bb9.el8.src.rpm","commit_id":"4cc82006fad6476eb106614ffbc4550c9454b521"}]}