I'm good with this one too, so that makes three if Joe is ok with this.
@Josh -- can you please take a look at the TH failures?
Thanks,
Michael
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 9/3/2014 5:08 PM, Andrey Kurilin wrote:
Hi All!
I'd like to
Hi Hossein,
openstack-dev is a development mailing list, focused around the future of
OpenStack and the development thereof. I would recommend that you address
your question (with appropriate debug log output) to the
openstack-operators mailing list.
Best regards,
Jesse
On 3 September 2014
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the meeting some concerns arose. I've listed those concerns below with
some comments hoping that it will help starting a discussion before the
next meeting. In addition, I've added some comments about the project
Hi Jesse,
Thanks for your help. I'll continue my discussion under the other related
mailing list.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Jesse Pretorius jesse.pretor...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Hossein,
openstack-dev is a development mailing list, focused around the future of
OpenStack and the
Hey,
Yep, I became aware of these this afternoon. The negative votes are due
to a bad nodepool image. I've rebuilt them and am working on clearing
the backlog. Sorry for the issues.
Cheers,
Josh
Rackspace Australia
On 9/4/14 4:30 PM, Michael Still wrote:
I'm good with this one too, so
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com wrote:
On Sep 3, 2014, at 5:27 AM, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Clark Boylan cboy...@sapwetik.org
wrote:
It has been pointed out to me that one case where it won't be so easy is
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com wrote:
On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Clark Boylan cboy...@sapwetik.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 08:22 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Clark Boylan cboy...@sapwetik.org wrote:
The setup.cfg
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2014-09-03 13:27:55 +0400 (+0400), Yuriy Taraday wrote:
[...]
May be we should drop 3.3 already?
It's in progress. Search review.openstack.org for open changes in
all projects with the topic py34. Shortly I'll also
On 09/04/2014 01:37 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 4 September 2014 00:13, Eoghan Glynn egl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/02/2014 11:33 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
The implementation in ceilometer is very different to the Ironic one -
are you saying the test you linked fails with Ironic, or that
hi all :
I found nova can not list the soft_deleted instances(v2 an v3 no show),
but seen from novaclient help
[tagett@stack-01 devstack]$ nova help restore
usage: nova restore server
Restore a soft-deleted server.
how can I restore a soft-deleted server ? we can not list the soft
deleted
hi all :
I found nova can not list the soft_deleted instances(v2 an v3 no show),
but seen from novaclient help
/[tagett@stack-01 devstack]$ nova help restore //
//usage: nova restore server//
//Restore a soft-deleted server./
how can I restore a soft-deleted server ? we can not list the
Hello.
I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for the instance tags API
extension:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97168/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103553/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/107712/
approved spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/91444/
blueprint was approved, but
hello,guys
port is a very important model concept for network program. I have some doubt
about that concept now.
Maybe it is still necessary to discuss the definition details of port and give
some suggestions.
For instance, when we connect a network to a router, neutron will create a
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-09-04 00:08:47 -0700:
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the meeting some concerns arose. I've listed those concerns below with
some comments hoping that it will help starting a discussion before
I didn't know that we could ask for FFE, so I'd like to ask (if
yet in time) for:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/agent-child-processes-status
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron+branch:master+topic:bp/agent-child-processes-status,n,z
To get
On 2 September 2014 19:16, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent
email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a freeze
exception:
* your code must already be up for review
* your blueprint must have an
On 2 September 2014 21:36, Dan Genin daniel.ge...@jhuapl.edu wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what is the rational behind upping the number of core
sponsors for feature freeze exception to 3 if only two +2 are required to
merge? In Icehouse, IIRC, two core sponsors was deemed sufficient.
We tried
-Original Message-
From: Nikola Đipanov [mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 03 September 2014 10:50
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for
Juno
snip
I will follow up with a more detailed email about what I
Hey Clint,
Thanks for reading, some comments in-line:
On 09/04/2014 10:30 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-09-04 00:08:47 -0700:
[snip]
- Concern on should we really reinvent a queue system rather than
piggyback on one
As mentioned in the meeting on
One final note: the specs referenced above didn't get approved until
Spec Freeze, which seemed to leave me with less time to implement
things. In fact, it seemed that a lot of specs didn't get approved
until spec freeze. Perhaps if we had more staggered approval of
specs, we'd have
Sorry for another top post, but I like how Nikola has pulled this
problem apart, and wanted to respond directly to his response.
On 3 September 2014 10:50, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
The reason many features including my own may not make the FF is not
because there was not enough
Carl,
Thanks a lot for your reply!
If I understand correctly, in VRRP case, keepalived will be responsible
for sending out GARPs? By checking the code you provided, I can see all
the _send_gratuitous_arp_packet call are wrapped by if not is_ha
condition.
Xu Han
On 09/04/2014 06:06 AM,
Greetings,
I'd like to request a FFE for 2 features I've been working on during
Juno which, unfortunately, haven been delayed for different reasons
during this time.
The first feature is the switch-over to glance_store. Glance store, for
those not familiar with it, is a library containing the
Hi Ajay,
Thank you for your work on this. Could you please send on review your code?
Here is the instruction:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Rally/Develop#How_to_contribute
Thanks
Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:47 PM, Ajay Kalambur (akalambu)
akala...@cisco.com
Kevin Benton wrote:
How is the master list compiled into a calendar? Is it possible to use
that same system to filter by project?
It's manual. I susbscribe to the wikipage and reflect the change in the
Google Cal. It's painful and error-prone. If anyone wants to do it, I'm
happy to give the
On 4 September 2014 19:53, Nejc Saje ns...@redhat.com wrote:
I used the terms that are used in the original caching use-case, as
described in [1] and are used in the pypi lib as well[2]. With the correct
approach, there aren't actually any partitions, 'replicas' actually denotes
the number of
On 14/08/14 00:03, James Polley wrote:
In recent history, we've been looking each week at stats
from http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/tripleo-openreviews.html
to get a gauge on how our review pipeline is tracking.
The main stats we've been tracking have been the since the last
The implementation in ceilometer is very different to the Ironic one -
are you saying the test you linked fails with Ironic, or that it fails
with the ceilometer code today?
Disclaimer: in Ironic terms, node = conductor, key = host
The test I linked fails with Ironic hash ring
Position statement
==
Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that
Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If
steps are not taken to avert this, the project is likely to loose
a non-trivial amount of talent, both regular code contributors
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Thanks for writing this up, interesting read.
5. Ceilometer's recommended storage driver is still MongoDB, although
Ceilometer has now support for sqlalchemy. (Please correct me if I'm wrong).
For sake of reference: Yes, MongoDB is currently the
Thanks, Dmitry.
Let's get short status on these items during Fuel Weekly Meeting today [1].
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-weekly-meeting-agenda
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Dmitry Pyzhov dpyz...@mirantis.com wrote:
Feature blockers:
Versioning
Hi,
I'd like to request a FFE for 4 changesets from the v2-on-v3-api
blueprint:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113814/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115515/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115576/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11/
They have all already been approved and were in the
On 09/04/2014 11:51 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 4 September 2014 19:53, Nejc Saje ns...@redhat.com wrote:
I used the terms that are used in the original caching use-case, as
described in [1] and are used in the pypi lib as well[2]. With the correct
approach, there aren't actually any
On 09/04/2014 02:07 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com
mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/02/2014 09:23 PM, Michael Still wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov
ndipa...@redhat.com
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
First of all all patches have been approved in time and just lost the
gate race.
Rejecting it makes little sense really, as it
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:05:57AM +, Day, Phil wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Nikola Đipanov [mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 03 September 2014 10:50
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for
Juno
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:58:58PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
First of all all patches have been approved in time and
On 09/04/2014 03:36 AM, Dean Troyer wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com
mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com
mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
The reason many features
On 09/04/2014 03:08 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the meeting some concerns arose. I've listed those concerns below with
some comments hoping that it will help starting a discussion before the
next meeting. In
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for putting together such a thoughtful piece - I probably need to
re-read it few times to take in everything you're saying, but a couple of
thoughts that did occur to me:
- I can see how this could help where a change is fully contained within a virt
driver, but I wonder
On 09/04/2014 07:34 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to request a FFE for 4 changesets from the v2-on-v3-api
blueprint:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113814/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115515/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115576/
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
First of all all patches have been approved in time and just lost the
gate
Hello,
I would like to request a FFE for 4 changesets to complete the
blueprint serial-ports.
Topic on gerrit:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/serial-ports,n,z
Blueprint on launchpad.net:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:42:11PM +0200, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
Hello,
I would like to request a FFE for 4 changesets to complete the
blueprint serial-ports.
Topic on gerrit:
On 09/04/2014 01:15 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Thanks for writing this up, interesting read.
Thank you for your feedback :)
Some comments in-line.
5. Ceilometer's recommended storage driver is still MongoDB, although
Ceilometer has now support for
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:14:39PM +, Day, Phil wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for putting together such a thoughtful piece - I probably need to
re-read it few times to take in everything you're saying, but a couple
of thoughts that did occur to me:
- I can see how this could help where a
Like I mentioned before, I think the only way out of the Nova death
spiral is to split code and give control over it to smaller dedicated
review teams. This is one way to do it. Thanks Dan for pulling this
together :)
A couple comments inline:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
[...]
This is a crisis.
On 09/04/2014 01:42 PM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
Hello,
I would like to request a FFE for 4 changesets to complete the
blueprint serial-ports.
Topic on gerrit:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/serial-ports,n,z
2014-09-03 20:31 GMT+09:00 Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com:
On 9/3/14, 12:50 PM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/02/2014 09:23 PM, Michael Still wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi.
On 09/04/2014 02:14 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 03:08 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the meeting some concerns arose. I've listed those concerns below with
some comments hoping that it will help starting a
On 09/04/2014 12:58 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
First of all all patches have been approved in time and just lost the
gate
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
First of all all patches have been
On 09/03/2014 11:37 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
As you all know, there has recently been several very active discussions
around how to improve assorted aspects of our development process. One idea
that was brought up is to come up with a list of cycle goals/project
priorities for Kilo [0].
To
On 09/04/2014 02:42 PM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
Hello,
I would like to request a FFE for 4 changesets to complete the
blueprint serial-ports.
Topic on gerrit:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/serial-ports,n,z
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com wrote:
I didn't know that we could ask for FFE, so I'd like to ask (if
yet in time) for:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/agent-child-processes-status
I'd like to request a FFE for the remaining changes from
vmware-spawn-refactor. They are:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114817/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117467/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117283/
2014-09-04 20:34 GMT+09:00 Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I'd like to request a FFE for 4 changesets from the v2-on-v3-api
blueprint:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113814/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115515/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115576/
Yesterday, we had a great conversation with Matt Rutkowski from IBM, one
of the authors of the CADF spec.
I was having a disconnect on what CADF offers and got it clarified.
My assumption was CADF was a set of transformation/extraction rules for
taking data from existing data structures and
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some
Hello,
I would like to ask for an extension for libvirt-start-lxc-from-block-devices
feature. It has been previously pushed from Ice house to Juno.
The spec [1] has been approved. One of the patches is a bug fix. Another patch
has been already approved and failed in the gate.
All patches has a
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:22:14PM +0200, Vladik Romanovsky wrote:
Hello,
I would like to ask for an extension for libvirt-start-lxc-from-block-devices
feature. It has been previously pushed from Ice house to Juno.
The spec [1] has been approved. One of the patches is a bug fix. Another
On 9/4/2014 4:21 AM, Day, Phil wrote:
One final note: the specs referenced above didn't get approved until
Spec Freeze, which seemed to leave me with less time to implement
things. In fact, it seemed that a lot of specs didn't get approved
until spec freeze. Perhaps if we had more staggered
On 09/04/2014 09:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for patches of v3-api-schema.
The list is the following:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67428/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103437/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103436/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/66783/
The one of them has already approved, but it
On 09/04/2014 09:30 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for patches of v3-api-schema.
The list is the following:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67428/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103437/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103436/
Hi,
I do not think that Nova is in a death spiral. I just think that the
current way of working at the moment is strangling the project. I do not
understand why we need to split drivers out of the core project. Why not
have the ability to provide Œcore review¹ status to people for reviewing
those
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:09:26PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I'd like to request a FFE for the remaining changes from
vmware-spawn-refactor. They are:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114817/
On 9/4/14, 4:30 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 09/04/2014 09:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the
On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote:
[...]
How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on?
A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a
cold and emotionless way to provide feedback on a change. Especially
on high-change-volume projects where
On 04/09/14 14:46, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:09:26PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I'd like to request a FFE for the remaining changes from
vmware-spawn-refactor. They are:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/
Hi everyone,
I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit
format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the
mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris,
within the constraints we have (already booked space and time).
On 09/04/2014 03:46 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:09:26PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I'd like to request a FFE for the remaining changes from
vmware-spawn-refactor. They are:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109754/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109755/
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for v2.1 API patches.
This request is different from Christopher's one.
His request is for the approved patches, but this is
for some patches which are not approved yet.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113169/ : flavor-manage API
On 09/03/2014 09:09 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net]
Sent: 03 September 2014 13:37
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev]
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a side effect
of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but not solve this problem).
My only question is about the need to separate out each virt driver into a
separate project, wouldn't you accomplish a lot of the
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
I'm good with this one too, so that makes three if Joe is ok with this.
I am ok with this, I hope the move to oslo.db will fix a few bugs for us
and the nova patch to review isn't too bad.
@Josh -- can you please take
Next week the Oslo team will be releasing a new version of oslotest that
replaces its use of the “mox” library with “mox3. This will allow us to
prepare a packaged version of oslotest that works on both python 2 and 3, which
is necessary for porting some of the other Oslo libraries as well as
On 08/29/2014 05:15 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 29/08/14 14:27, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/26/2014 10:14 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
Steve Baker has started the process of moving Heat tests out of the
Tempest repository and into the Heat repository, and we're looking for
some guidance on how they should
On 4 September 2014 14:07, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
Some
Hi,
The main sr-iov patches have gone through lots of code reviews, manual
rebasing, etc. Now we have some critical refactoring work on the existing infra
to get it ready. All the code for refactoring and sr-iov is up for review.
Yes, I wrote them. I use them all the time -- no typo that I know of.
They are great for spinning up a cluster and running EDP jobs.
They may need some polish, but the point is to test the whole chain of
operations from the CLI. This is contrary to what most OpenStack
projects traditionally do
by the way, what typo?
Trev
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 14:58 -0700, Andrew Lazarev wrote:
Hi team,
Today I've realized that we have some tests called 'integration'
in python-saharaclient. Also I've found out that Jenkins doesn't use
them and they can't be run starting from April because of
Sean Dague wrote:
[...]
So, honestly, I'll probably remain -1 on the final integration vote, not
because Zaqar is bad, but because I'm feeling more firmly that for
OpenStack to not leave the small deployers behind we need to redefine
the tightly integrated piece of OpenStack to basically the
On 09/02/2014 07:15 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 11 August 2014 19:26, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
The above does not really make sense for MySQL Galera/PXC clusters *if only
Galera nodes are used in the cluster*. Since Galera is synchronously
replicated, there's no real point in
My only question is about the need to separate out each virt driver into a
separate project, wouldn't you
accomplish a lot of the benefit by creating a single virt project that
includes all of the drivers?
I don't think there's particularly a *point* to having all drivers in one repo.
On 9/04/2014 Sandy Walsh wrote:
Yesterday, we had a great conversation with Matt Rutkowski from IBM,
one
of the authors of the CADF spec.
I was having a disconnect on what CADF offers and got it clarified.
My assumption was CADF was a set of transformation/extraction rules
for
taking
Hi folks,
We'll be having the Sahara team meeting as usual in
#openstack-meeting-alt channel.
Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/SaharaAgenda#Next_meetings
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Sahara+Meetingiso=20140904T18
--
Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
On 04/09/14 14:54, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote:
[...]
How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on?
A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a
cold and emotionless way to provide feedback on a change.
As for the sahara-ci, I don't think that we'll have enough free
resources on it to run one more set of tests. So, waiting for more 3rd
party CIs :)
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Trevor McKay tmc...@redhat.com wrote:
by the way, what typo?
Trev
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 14:58 -0700, Andrew
On 09/04/2014 04:59 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Sean Dague wrote:
[...]
So, honestly, I'll probably remain -1 on the final integration vote, not
because Zaqar is bad, but because I'm feeling more firmly that for
OpenStack to not leave the small deployers behind we need to redefine
the tightly
Le 04/09/2014 15:36, Gary Kotton a écrit :
Hi,
I do not think that Nova is in a death spiral. I just think that the
current way of working at the moment is strangling the project. I do not
understand why we need to split drivers out of the core project. Why not
have the ability to provide Œcore
On 9/4/2014 9:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:33:27PM +, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned,
a side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help
but not solve this problem).
Thanks for taking
Le 04/09/2014 17:00, Solly Ross a écrit :
My only question is about the need to separate out each virt driver into a
separate project, wouldn't you
accomplish a lot of the benefit by creating a single virt project that includes
all of the drivers?
I don't think there's particularly a *point*
The main sr-iov patches have gone through lots of code reviews, manual
rebasing, etc. Now we have some critical refactoring work on the
existing infra to get it ready. All the code for refactoring and sr-iov
is up for review.
I've been doing a lot of work on this recently, and plan to see
I would like to request a feature freeze exception for
LVM ephemeral storage encryption[1].
The spec[2] for which was approved early in the Juno release cycle.
This feature provides security for data at-rest on compute nodes. The
proposed feature protects user data from disclosure due
On 09/04/2014 04:51 PM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote:
On 4 September 2014 14:07, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 10:18:04AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
- Changes submitted to nova common code would trigger running of CI
tests against the external virt drivers. Each virt driver core team
would decide whether they want their driver to be tested upon Nova
common
Trevor,
by the way, what typo?
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/118903/
Andrew.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Trevor McKay tmc...@redhat.com wrote:
by the way, what typo?
Trev
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 14:58 -0700, Andrew Lazarev wrote:
Hi team,
Today I've realized that we have
1. os-apply-config: release: 0.1.19 -- 0.1.20
-- https://pypi.python.org/pypi/os-apply-config/0.1.20
--
http://tarballs.openstack.org/os-apply-config/os-apply-config-0.1.20.tar.gz
2. os-refresh-config: no changes, 0.1.7
3. os-collect-config: release: 0.1.27 -- 0.1.28
+1
I very much agree with Dan's the propsal.
I am concerned about difficulties we will face with merging
patches that spreads accross various regions: manager, conductor, scheduler,
etc..
However, I think, this is a small price to pay for having a more focused teams.
IMO, we will stiil have
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
