)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":15334,"name":"Stephen Finucane","display_name":"stephenfin","email":"stephenfin@redhat.com","username":"sfinucan"},"change_message_id":"fdd2052204c8cec32b6321d99f11c2fb57504908","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"7daa0d26_f3a16987","updated":"2023-09-05 14:57:32.000000000","message":"Wuh wuh. The test failures are valid and are occurring because we use a blacklist model when deciding what ports to show in python-openstackclient.","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"4823f039c00a44db13e5771a9f4792ed5425628a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"1305d1a0_50bd056a","in_reply_to":"4b258ece_90287d37","updated":"2023-09-14 15:50:58.000000000","message":"That\u0027s the same, from my point of view. What I was proposing is to continue creating this list from the SDK resource definition because that is actually testing what SDK has defined, instead of changing this manual list. But the issue here is that OSC is using a fake port that doesn\u0027t contain the latest SDK resource fields. This is why, for now, your idea should work (as is now).\n\nWe\u0027ll find a way to make OSC aware of the SDK dependencies in this cross CI check.","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":15334,"name":"Stephen Finucane","display_name":"stephenfin","email":"stephenfin@redhat.com","username":"sfinucan"},"change_message_id":"8719b26a85f373efb32fd45dfb421e118f90ccbc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"c09547d0_b279d5b5","in_reply_to":"4b5706d2_7ec89c02","updated":"2023-09-08 10:00:20.000000000","message":"Do you want to just remove the explicit column check? tbh, it probably doesn\u0027t make sense if we\u0027re not explicitly whitelisting columns as it\u0027s possible/likely to change again in the future. If we remove that check, we should be able to merge this then (though you might need to cut a release before the non-tips jobs will pass).","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"e6dc4b89220f6796ff5697ebbe9edec20664cbb3","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"4b5706d2_7ec89c02","in_reply_to":"7daa0d26_f3a16987","updated":"2023-09-08 09:12:56.000000000","message":"I\u0027ve manually tested the OSC tests adding [1], that is the sibling patch for OSC. Test are passing. However OSC patch depends on SDK one, so I don\u0027t know how to proceed.\n\n[1]https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/892792","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"54be3e409704bce061048b16e4d2029664c97249","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"e82a3055_d862e9df","in_reply_to":"7f63e880_6ab34ad2","updated":"2023-09-12 15:54:30.000000000","message":"I tested the OSC patch and now this patch is passing. I see you are removing the use of \"get_osc_show_columns_for_sdk_resource\" [1] and returning a static tuple. The \"get_osc_show_columns_for_sdk_resource\" method was actually checking and using the real SDK resource definition. That was better for the test coverage.\n\nBut of course we have the problem of the cross dependencies between SDK and OSC, as in this patch.\n\nInstead of this, why don\u0027t we implement the \"_get_common_cols_data\" method in SDK? I\u0027m talking about [2]. If we retrieve the columns from the SDK object, we\u0027ll always match the SDK resource definition:\n* New SDK resources will pass the OSC CI jobs.\n* New OSC patches will require a new SDK release (as is now, that is not changing).\n\n[1]https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/894510/2/openstackclient/network/v2/port.py#b68\n[2]https://github.com/openstack/python-openstackclient/blob/08faf81d0d81153d0b11d155a2162f00c039cb3f/openstackclient/tests/unit/network/v2/test_port.py#L41C9-L41C30","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":27900,"name":"Artem Goncharov","email":"artem.goncharov@gmail.com","username":"gtema"},"change_message_id":"41db16d0e9f51775518af8b0e203bfb51f87f601","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"b6959960_a4cf7638","in_reply_to":"858783ac_93813699","updated":"2023-09-14 11:10:02.000000000","message":"is osc-tox-py38-tips job what you are looking for (SDK + osc tips)?","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"8db11fd6c4060bab7452eacf44589f7cc9abed7c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"858783ac_93813699","in_reply_to":"8871446a_28debcdf","updated":"2023-09-14 09:52:51.000000000","message":"Sorry but your argument of testing two automated values is what your are implementing in [1]. What I\u0027m saying is that the SDK (from \"get_osc_show_columns_for_sdk_resource\") is actually returning the SDK resource columns, that is accurate with the current patch.\n\nIn any case, in order to unblock this situation, we can consider your OSC patch and later find a way to make OSC aware of the SDK changes in this cross testing CI.\n\n[1]https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/894510/2/openstackclient/network/v2/port.py#b68","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":15334,"name":"Stephen Finucane","display_name":"stephenfin","email":"stephenfin@redhat.com","username":"sfinucan"},"change_message_id":"d30e5194e5065e4528cf912c408b4d4c5c82dd1e","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"7f63e880_6ab34ad2","in_reply_to":"a8a09c13_d84e10e6","updated":"2023-09-11 10:11:18.000000000","message":"My guess is that I2e71a3c0fefb56ddcc75865c95746550e2710aa3 is the culprit. That switch us to use a correct `Port`-based fake. I\u0027ve proposed [1]. If we can merge and release that, we should be able to merge this then. As I noted in the change though, this is going to be an issue for quite a few test cases going forward so if there are suggestions for a better approach I\u0027m all ears.\n\n[1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/894510","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":15334,"name":"Stephen Finucane","display_name":"stephenfin","email":"stephenfin@redhat.com","username":"sfinucan"},"change_message_id":"e7a737b7293ca219765f48c42577803c722a996e","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"4b258ece_90287d37","in_reply_to":"b6959960_a4cf7638","updated":"2023-09-14 11:30:20.000000000","message":"\u003e Sorry but your argument of testing two automated values is what your are implementing in [1].\n\nThey\u0027re not automated. I\u0027ve _manually_ specified a list of opts rather than _automatically_ pulling them out with `osc_lib.utils.get_osc_show_columns_for_sdk_resource`. Or am I missing something?","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":16688,"name":"Rodolfo Alonso","email":"ralonsoh@redhat.com","username":"rodolfo-alonso-hernandez"},"change_message_id":"0a259af4a554ef1d8a0b1f8863373aa04bf0e41a","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"a8a09c13_d84e10e6","in_reply_to":"c09547d0_b279d5b5","updated":"2023-09-08 13:33:33.000000000","message":"What I don\u0027t understand is what changed in the testing method. This check in OSC has been there for a while [0] and never failed before. For example, I added [1] before (3 years ago) and these tests passed.\n\nI really don\u0027t know how to mock other project. OSC class \"TestCreatePort\" is creating the port using an internally defined dictionary:\n```\n  _port \u003d network_fakes.create_one_port()\n```\n\nI would ask for some advise here and how to proceed.\n\n[0]https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-openstackclient/+/355797\n[1]https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/openstacksdk/+/740422","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"},{"author":{"_account_id":15334,"name":"Stephen Finucane","display_name":"stephenfin","email":"stephenfin@redhat.com","username":"sfinucan"},"change_message_id":"588abe92b6655b2f7dc07a84cb38d4e854655399","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"8871446a_28debcdf","in_reply_to":"e82a3055_d862e9df","updated":"2023-09-13 12:56:50.000000000","message":"Implementing `_get_common_cols_data` in SDK seems unnecessary. The issue here is that we automatically generate the list of columns to show in the code but manually specify a list of columns in the tests. If we were to automate the latter, we\u0027d effectively be comparing two automated values, which is silly and unnecessary. If we don\u0027t want to start manually stating a list of columns to show, I\u0027d personally prefer to just test the type of the return values from commands (i.e. ensure it is a 2-item tuple of lists) rather the exact values returned.","commit_id":"77b884ef4460d89ba14f353a237924ee267bdbe5"}]}