Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle]Nominating Victor Morales as Tricircle Core

Thank you all for your voting. Victor, you are now included in the core team. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang (joehuang) From: Yipei Niu [newy...@gmail.com] Sent: 01 March 2017 15:06 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 06:07:47PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 05:01:43PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > > > And yes there are now plenty of pep8 jobs that are failing with PBR 2.0.0 > > > > We can't revert the requirements change that landed which means that > > projects >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 05:01:43PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > And yes there are now plenty of pep8 jobs that are failing with PBR 2.0.0 > > We can't revert the requirements change that landed which means that projects > using old hacking versions are going to need an update :( One option may

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][swg] per-project "Business only" moderated mailing lists

On 13:04 Feb 27, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-02-27 15:43:12 -0500: > > > > As a person who sends a lot of process-driven email to this list, > > it is not working for my needs to communicate with others. > > > > Over the past few cycles when I was the

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

Thank you guys! Michal, you’re now included to the core team. Renat Akhmerov @Nokia > On 2 Mar 2017, at 03:50, Lingxian Kong wrote: > > +1, she indeed has been doing great contribution to Mistral, welcome, Michal > :-) > > > Cheers, > Lingxian Kong (Larry) > > On

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 04:41:14PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:48:05PM +1100, Ian Wienand wrote: > > On 03/02/2017 01:13 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Tony identified caps in 5 OpenStack community projects (see [1]) as well > > > as powervm and python-jsonpath-rw-ext.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:48:05PM +1100, Ian Wienand wrote: > On 03/02/2017 01:13 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Tony identified caps in 5 OpenStack community projects (see [1]) as well > > as powervm and python-jsonpath-rw-ext. Pull requests to those other > > projects are linked from the bug [2].

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-docs] [docs][release][ptl] Adding docs to the release schedule

On 2/3/17 5:07 am, Alexandra Settle wrote: On 3/1/17, 5:58 PM, "John Dickinson" wrote: On 1 Mar 2017, at 9:52, Alexandra Settle wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” period on the

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment][TripleO][kolla][ansible][fuel] Next steps for cross project collaboration

+1 for the monthly meetings and a long standing, cross-team, collaborative etherpad. It’s challenging for some projects who already collaborate heavily with communities outside of OpenStack to take on additional heavy meeting cycles. The PTG deployment cross-team collaboration was really

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 03/02/2017 01:13 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Tony identified caps in 5 OpenStack community projects (see [1]) as well as powervm and python-jsonpath-rw-ext. Pull requests to those other projects are linked from the bug [2]. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bug/1668848 Am I nuts or

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment][TripleO][kolla][ansible][fuel] Next steps for cross project collaboration

Andy, A monthly meeting as I have voiced before in this thread is not sufficient to enable good cross-project collaboration. To rectify this, when Steve Hardy started this thread, I started the process of creating an IRC channel in #openstack-deployment. I understand there has been one voice

[openstack-dev] [all] Significant update to ARA (Ansible Run Analysis)

Hi, Just a heads up for projects that are currently using ARA [1]: I've tagged and extensively tested a release candidate which contains a serious UI overhaul. At first glance, projects like devstack-gate [2], openstack-ansible [3], openstack-ansible-tests [4] and kolla-ansible [5] seem to be

Re: [openstack-dev] Zuul v3 - What's Coming: What to expect with the Zuul v3 Rollout

Thanks for the great write-up Monty :-). Last week was great fun and zuulv3 is making excellent process. I'm excited for the switch-over. Cheers, Josh On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > Hi everybody! > > This content can also be found at >

[openstack-dev] [all] Cloud-init VM instance not coming up in a multi-node DevStack envionment

Hi, I recently created a multi-node DevStack environment (based on stable/ocata) made up of the following nodes: -1 Controller Node -1 Network Node -2 Compute Nodes All VM instances are only deployed on the 2 compute nodes. Neutron network services are provided by the network

[openstack-dev] [Horizon][stable][requirements] Modifying global-requirements to cap xstatic package versions

Hi folks, We've run into some issues with various folks installing Horizon and its dependencies using just requirements.txt which doesn't limit the versions of xstatic packages beyond some minimum version. This is a particular problem for releases prior to Ocata since those are not compatible

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][docs] Is anyone interested in being the docs liaison for Nova?

Hi, I'm not a native English speaker but I would like to have a try if possible :) On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > There is a need for a liaison from Nova for the docs team to help with > compute-specific docs in the install guide and various

[openstack-dev] [kuryr] 2nd day recording for the Virtual Team Gathering

Hi Kuryrs! Thanks again for joining the Virtual team Gathering sessions. Here you have the links to the recordings: https://youtu.be/o1RKNOAhqho https://youtu.be/ovbK5kk5AZ0 See you today on the last day of this first VTG! Toni

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:29:14PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-03-01 13:24:09 -0800 (-0800), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > [...] > > Other projects spent some time upfront and adopted constraints > > quite a while ago. I am surprised that there are still stable > > branches that don't do

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 01:24:09PM -0800, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > I am surprised that there are still > stable branches that don't do that. It's so much easier to maintain > them with constraints in place! Taking a tanget. At the begining of the Ocata cycle we only had 55% constraints usage on

[openstack-dev] [cross-project][nova][cinder][designate][neutron] Common support-matrix.py

Hey all, I kicked off a thread [1] to start talking about approaches with improving vendor discoveribility by improving our Market Place [2]. In order to improve our market place, having the projects be more part of the process would allow the information to be more accurate of what vendors have

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs][release][ptl] Adding docs to the release schedule

On 1 Mar 2017, at 10:07, Alexandra Settle wrote: > On 3/1/17, 5:58 PM, "John Dickinson" wrote: > > > > On 1 Mar 2017, at 9:52, Alexandra Settle wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” > period on the

[openstack-dev] [nova] Pike PTG recap - API

On Thursday afternoon at the PTG we talked about various API-related topics. The full etherpad is here [1]. These are the highlights. Policy -- There was a separate etherpad for this [2]. We talked through a few proposals that John Garbutt has for dealing with policy in nova. One was for

Re: [openstack-dev] Zuul v3 - What's Coming: What to expect with the Zuul v3 Rollout

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Kosnik, Lubosz wrote: > So did I understand that properly. There will be possibility to create real > multi-node tests like with 3-4 nodes? You can already do that, openstack-infra/nodepool proposes some 2-nodes, 3-nodes and even 4-nodes

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][defcore][refstack] Removal of the v2.0 API

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > During the PTG, Morgan mentioned that there was the possibility of > keystone removing the v2.0 API [0]. This thread is a follow up from that > discussion to make sure we loop in the right people and do everything by >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Tap-as-a-Service] Problem in visualizing port-mirroring information

Hi Manik, If the br-tap bridge is not present it is an indication that the TaaS Agent is not running. For a single-node setup, you will need to add both of the following lines: enable_service taas enable_service taas_openvswitch_agent to the local.conf file. You can follow the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 3/1/2017 8:13 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2017-03-01 07:57:31 -0500: On 03/01/2017 12:26 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: Hi All, Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the major version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in

[openstack-dev] [keystone][defcore][refstack] Removal of the v2.0 API

During the PTG, Morgan mentioned that there was the possibility of keystone removing the v2.0 API [0]. This thread is a follow up from that discussion to make sure we loop in the right people and do everything by the books. The result of the session [1] listed the following work items: - Figure

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

On 2017-03-01 13:24:09 -0800 (-0800), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: [...] > Other projects spent some time upfront and adopted constraints > quite a while ago. I am surprised that there are still stable > branches that don't do that. [...] Yep, I had to backport it for some oslo.middleware stable

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

Agreed. All I am saying is that as long as there was no change in the policy, projects are expected to keep up. I see that upper-constraints.txt mentioned in the email several times. I believe it's the least that the project could do to fix the branch, and lack of the fix doesn't seem like a good

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment][TripleO][kolla][ansible][fuel] Next steps for cross project collaboration

We can increase cadence as needed (for example closer to release when we all have to deal with project changes). Also some ptg/forum scheduling for sessions like that (so they won't be taken from our projects usual track. Thank you TripleO community for your precious session time!). On 1 March

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] Monitoring script framework PoC

I think this is a great idea. It's fairly straight forward to contribute to, and with the aim to support multiple output formats I can see this benefiting lots of folks without being bound to a single system. __ OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Boot from Volume meeting?

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: [trim] >> Speaking of which, I propose the networking subteam to start (continue?) >> having their own meeting as well. There is a lot of

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

+1, she indeed has been doing great contribution to Mistral, welcome, Michal :-) Cheers, Lingxian Kong (Larry) On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Renat Akhmerov wrote: > Hi, > > Based on the stats of Michal Gershenzon in Ocata cycle I’d like to promote > her to the core

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

On 2017-03-01 11:36:47 -0800 (-0800), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy > wrote: > > With all the above, the question is should we really fix the gates for the > > mitaka branch now? According to OpenStack release page [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Boot from Volume meeting?

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Thanks for writing this! > > On 02/28/2017 03:42 PM, Julia Kreger wrote: > >> Greetings fellow ironic humanoids! >> >> As many have known, I've been largely attempting to drive Boot from >> Volume functionality in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Mar 1, 2017, at 4:57 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > I also wonder if we can grant the release team +2 permissions on > everything in OpenStack so that fixes like this can be gotten in quickly > without having to go chase a bunch of teams. I would be very much opposed to this. Isn't

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy wrote: > With all the above, the question is should we really fix the gates for the > mitaka branch now? According to OpenStack release page [1] the Mitaka > release will reach end-of-life on April 10, 2017. Yes

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-03-01 14:04:19 -0500: >> Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 19:50:51 +0100: >> > On 2017-03-01 17:13, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> > > Excerpts from Andreas

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][swg] per-project "Business only" moderated mailing lists

Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2017-03-01 10:03:34 -0800: > Excerpts from Jonathan Bryce's message of 2017-03-01 11:49:38 -0600: > > > > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 4:25 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > > > > Clint Byrum wrote: > > So, I'll ask more generally: do

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

> On Mar 1, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy > wrote: > > Greetings ironicers, > > I'd like to discuss the state of the gates in ironic and other related > projects for stable/mitaka branch. > > Today while making some test patches to old branches I

[openstack-dev] [ironic] state of the stable/mitaka branches

Greetings ironicers, I'd like to discuss the state of the gates in ironic and other related projects for stable/mitaka branch. Today while making some test patches to old branches I discovered the following problems: python-ironicclient/stable/mitaka All unit-test-like jobs are broken due to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-03-01 14:04:19 -0500: > Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 19:50:51 +0100: > > On 2017-03-01 17:13, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 16:22:24 +0100: > > >> On 2017-03-01 06:26, Tony

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 19:50:51 +0100: > On 2017-03-01 17:13, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 16:22:24 +0100: > >> On 2017-03-01 06:26, Tony Breeds wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> Earlier today the release team tagged PBR

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 2017-03-01 17:13, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 16:22:24 +0100: >> On 2017-03-01 06:26, Tony Breeds wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the >>> major >>> version bump is because warnerrors

[openstack-dev] Status of Zuul v3

Greetings! Welcome to the first-ever Zuul v3 status update. :) This periodic update is primarily intended as a way to keep contributors to the OpenStack community apprised of Zuul v3 project status, including future changes and milestones on our way to use in production. Additionally, the

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs][release][ptl] Adding docs to the release schedule

On 3/1/17, 5:58 PM, "John Dickinson" wrote: On 1 Mar 2017, at 9:52, Alexandra Settle wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” period on the release schedule. > > We would formulate it as a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][swg] per-project "Business only" moderated mailing lists

Excerpts from Jonathan Bryce's message of 2017-03-01 11:49:38 -0600: > > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 4:25 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > > Clint Byrum wrote: > So, I'll ask more generally: do you believe that the single openstack-dev > mailing list is working fine

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs][release][ptl] Adding docs to the release schedule

On 1 Mar 2017, at 9:52, Alexandra Settle wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” period on > the release schedule. > > We would formulate it as a deadline, so that it fits in the schedule and > making it coincide with the RC1 deadline. > >

[openstack-dev] [docs][release][ptl] Adding docs to the release schedule

Hi everyone, I would like to propose that we introduce a “Review documentation” period on the release schedule. We would formulate it as a deadline, so that it fits in the schedule and making it coincide with the RC1 deadline. For projects that are not following the milestones, we would

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][swg] per-project "Business only" moderated mailing lists

> On Feb 28, 2017, at 4:25 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Clint Byrum wrote: So, I'll ask more generally: do you believe that the single openstack-dev mailing list is working fine and we should change nothing? If not, what problems has it created for you?

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

+1. Although I am not a core member, I’ve known her from IRC and got a chance to meet in person recently and I would like her in the core. Regards, sharatss From: lương hữu tuấn [mailto:tuantulu...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 10:38 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not

[openstack-dev] The OpenStack Summit is returning to Vancouver in May 2018

Hi everyone, Back by popular demand, the OpenStack Summit is returning to Vancouver , BC , BC from May 21-24, 2018. Registration, sponsorship

Re: [openstack-dev] Zuul v3 - What's Coming: What to expect with the Zuul v3 Rollout

Yes. It is also worth noting you can do this today too and some projects/tests do. Clark On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, at 09:31 AM, Kosnik, Lubosz wrote: > So did I understand that properly. There will be possibility to create > real multi-node tests like with 3-4 nodes? > > Cheers, > Lubosz > > On Feb

[openstack-dev] Newton: not able to login via public key

Hi all, I have installed a newton openstack, not able to login into machines via private keys. I followed this guide https://docs.openstack.org/ newton/install-guide-ubuntu/ Configure the metadata agent¶

Re: [openstack-dev] Zuul v3 - What's Coming: What to expect with the Zuul v3 Rollout

So did I understand that properly. There will be possibility to create real multi-node tests like with 3-4 nodes? Cheers, Lubosz On Feb 28, 2017, at 7:13 PM, joehuang > wrote: So cool! Look forward to multi-node jobs as first class Best Regards

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

+1 for me. Sorry Michal if you read this thread, I thought that you are a man by calling you Mike :d. Tuan/Nokia On Mar 1, 2017 6:04 PM, "Dougal Matthews" wrote: > > > On 1 March 2017 at 16:47, Renat Akhmerov wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Based on the

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

On 1 March 2017 at 16:47, Renat Akhmerov wrote: > Hi, > > Based on the stats of Michal Gershenzon in Ocata cycle I’d like to promote > her to the core team. > Michal works at Nokia CloudBand and being a CloudBand engineer she knows > Mistral very well > as a user and

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

+1 Michal, remember that with great power comes great responsibility :) Thanks, Dawid On Wed, 2017-03-01 at 19:47 +0300, Renat Akhmerov wrote: Hi, Based on the stats of Michal Gershenzon in Ocata cycle I’d like to promote her to the core team. Michal works at Nokia CloudBand and being a

[openstack-dev] [mistral] Proposing Michal Gershenzon to the core team

Hi, Based on the stats of Michal Gershenzon in Ocata cycle I’d like to promote her to the core team. Michal works at Nokia CloudBand and being a CloudBand engineer she knows Mistral very well as a user and behind the scenes helped find a lot of bugs and make countless number of improvements,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

Excerpts from Andreas Jaeger's message of 2017-03-01 16:22:24 +0100: > On 2017-03-01 06:26, Tony Breeds wrote: > > Hi All, > > Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the > > major > > version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in favor of > >

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] Monitoring script framework PoC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hey there, One of the items discussed at the PTG[0] was the creation of some monitoring scripts in a framework that could monitor various OpenStack services, support services (RabbitMQ/Galera/etc), and some system basics. There's a spec

[openstack-dev] [nova][docs] Is anyone interested in being the docs liaison for Nova?

There is a need for a liaison from Nova for the docs team to help with compute-specific docs in the install guide and various manuals. For example, we documented placement and cells v2 in the nova devref in Ocata but instructions on those aren't in the install guide, so the docs team is

[openstack-dev] [designate] Re:add new features in designate-dashboard

> From: *Saju M* > > Date: Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:43 PM > Subject: add new features in designate-dashboard > To: gra...@hayes.ie , gra...@managedit.ie > , graham.ha...@hp.com >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 2017-03-01 06:26, Tony Breeds wrote: > Hi All, > Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the major > version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in favor of > warning-is-error from sphinx >= 1.5.0. Can we change the sphinx==1.3.6 line in upper-constraints

[openstack-dev] [neutron][address-scope] Questions about l3 address scope

Hi, all. I have some questions about l3 address scope in neutron.I hope that someone could give me some answers. I set up a devstack environment and it uses the feature of l3 address scope by following the document [1]. After doing those steps, I can find some iptables rules in namespace,

Re: [openstack-dev] [deployment][TripleO][kolla][ansible][fuel] Next steps for cross project collaboration

On 28 February 2017 at 08:25, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 28/02/17 08:01 +, Jesse Pretorius wrote: > >> On 2/28/17, 12:52 AM, "Michał Jastrzębski" wrote: >> >>I think instead of adding yet-another-irc-channel how about create >>weekly meetings? We

[openstack-dev] [trove] Weekly meeting today canceled

My apologies for the short notice but I have a conflict at 1pm and since we had the mid-cycle last week, things are still relatively fresh in everyone's mind. So, I'm going to cancel this weeks meeting and resume regular weekly meetings next week. In the interim, if you need something Trove

[openstack-dev] [Sahara] Pike PTG summary

Hello Saharans and other interested parties, here I'm going to try to summarize our discussions at the PTG and our main actions to continue improving Sahara in this next cycle. The whole etherpad can be found here: sahara-ptg-pike Python 3.5

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptls] PTG Team Photos!

Hello :) You should be able to download it from here: https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/152419717@N06/sets/72157680602754246/ Let me know if there is anything else you need. -Kendall On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, 7:30 AM Telles Nobrega wrote: > Hi Kendall, > > can you send me the

Re: [openstack-dev] [picasso] First meeting on 7th of March

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Derek Schultz wrote: > Hello all, > > The Picasso team will be running our first meeting next Tuesday. All those > interested in the project are welcome! > > For those of you not familiar with Picasso, it provides a platform for >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Boot from Volume meeting?

Hi Julia, Thanks for asking! I'm agnostic about whether the BFV meeting should use the same day/time as the ironic-neutron meeting was. As long as people who are/will be attending this meeting are fine with the date/time, I'm fine too :) I would actually prefer that the date/times are chosen

[openstack-dev] [relmgt] Pike PTG recap

Hi everyone, The release management team gathered at the PTG on Monday afternoon, then together with the stable and requirements teams on Tuesday afternoon. Most of the time was spent reviewing the Pike plan and priorities. In case you missed it, the Pike schedule was made official and published

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][keystone] Pike PTG recap - quotas

FWIW - There was a lengthy discussion in #openstack-dev yesterday regarding this [0]. [0] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-dev/%23openstack-dev.2017-02-28.log.html#t2017-02-28T17:39:48 On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:42 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 27

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2017-03-01 07:57:31 -0500: > On 03/01/2017 12:26 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: > > Hi All, > > Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the > > major > > version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in favor of > > warning-is-error

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Boot from Volume meeting?

Thanks for writing this! On 02/28/2017 03:42 PM, Julia Kreger wrote: Greetings fellow ironic humanoids! As many have known, I've been largely attempting to drive Boot from Volume functionality in ironic over the past two years. Largely, in a slow incremental approach, which is in part due to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][requirements] Eventlet verion bump coming?

Hi Tony, I'm ready to help with this! The version we use now (0.19.0) has (at least) 2 known issues: - recv_into() >8kb from an SSL wrapped socket hangs [1] - adjusting of system clock backwards makes periodic tasks hang [2] so it'd be great to allow for newer releases in upper-constraints.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 01/03/2017 13:00, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/01/2017 12:26 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: >> Hi All, >> Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the >> major >> version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in favor of >> warning-is-error from sphinx >= 1.5.0. >> >> It

[openstack-dev] [all] Forum Brainstorming - Boston 2017

Hi everyone, We need to start brainstorming topics we'd like to discuss with the rest of the community during our first "Forum" at the OpenStack Summit in Boston. The event should look a lot like the cross-project workshops or the Ops day at the old Design Summit : open, timeboxed discussions in

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][blazar][ceilometer][congress][intel-nfv-ci-tests][ironic][manila][networking-bgpvpn][networking-fortinet][networking-sfc][neutron][neutron-fwaas][neutron-lbaas][nova-lxd][octa

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:21 AM Takashi Yamamoto wrote: > hi, > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Andrea Frittoli > wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > TL;DR: if today you import manager,py from tempest.scenario please > maintain > > a copy of [0]

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptls] PTG Team Photos!

Hi Kendall, can you send me the Sahara team photo? Thanks On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM Kendall Nelson wrote: > To be a little more specific about the location. It's just outside the > Grand ballroom A. Close to the top of the staircase. > > - Kendall Nelson

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On 03/01/2017 08:03 AM, Andrea Frittoli wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:54 PM Sean Dague > wrote: > > On 03/01/2017 07:35 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann >

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On Wednesday, 1 March 2017 13:35:26 CET Jordan Pittier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann > > > 2. Start refactoring the scenario framework by adding more and more helper > > function under /common or lib. > > Starting a "framework" (each time I see

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:54 PM Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/01/2017 07:35 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann > > wrote: > > > > Doing gradual refactoring and fixing

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] PBR 2.0.0 release *may* cause gate failures

On 03/01/2017 12:26 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: > Hi All, > Earlier today the release team tagged PBR 2.0.0. The reason for the major > version bump is because warnerrors has been removed in favor of > warning-is-error from sphinx >= 1.5.0. > > It seems that several projects outside both inside

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:39 PM Jordan Pittier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann > wrote: > > Doing gradual refactoring and fixing plugins time to time needs lot of > wait and sync. > > That needs: > 1. Plugins to switch

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On 03/01/2017 07:35 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann > wrote: > > Doing gradual refactoring and fixing plugins time to time needs lot > of wait and sync. > > That needs: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:18 AM, wrote: > I think it a good solution, I already put +1 :) > > > And, as to the scenario testcases, shall we: > > 1) remove test steps/checks already coverd in API test > Duplicate test steps/checks is not good and should be removed. It's not

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA]Refactoring Scenarios manager.py

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > Doing gradual refactoring and fixing plugins time to time needs lot of > wait and sync. > > That needs: > 1. Plugins to switch from current method usage. Plugins to have some other > function or same copy paste code

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Single core review for patch approval

Yep I totally agree that adding cores for the sake of adding cores doesn’t make sense. Just trying to fish for ideas to prevent having to go to a single +2 to merge as that does make me nervous. But I guess for the sake of moving code through it needs to be done at the moment. > On 1 Mar

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Single core review for patch approval

Adding inexperienced cores doesn't really alleviate that issue though, and I don't currently feel that there is anyone with the right balance of experience and activity to be added to the core team. Me and Richard monitor review activity very closely though, and we are actively looking to grow

[openstack-dev] [ironic] gate jobs using or enabling *_ssh drivers

Hi ironicers, at the PTG we decided to remove the unsupported SSH drivers from ironic code tree during Pike release. Below is an update on which CI jobs for projects under Baremetal program governance do still use them and thus are blocking us from removing these drivers. tl;dr: 2 tempest-dsvm

Re: [openstack-dev] Ansible OpenStack dnsmasq errors in syslog

Hi Lawrence, Thanks for raising this. The 10.255.255.x range is used by lxcbr0 on the host, to assign the eth0 address to the containers. In essence this won't cause any issues - since we use the eth1 address (which is statically configured) and we add the host entries to /etc/hosts. That said,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][keystone] Pike PTG recap - quotas

On 27 February 2017 at 21:18, Matt Riedemann wrote: > We talked about a few things related to quotas at the PTG, some in > cross-project sessions earlier in the week and then some on Wednesday > morning in the Nova room. The full etherpad is here [1]. > > Counting quotas >

[openstack-dev] [nova] Pike PTG recap - notifications

Hi, We discussed couple of notification related items last week on the PTG [1]. Searchlight related notification enhancements - We decided that the Extending versioned notifications for searchlight integration blueprint [2] has high priority for

[openstack-dev] Ansible OpenStack dnsmasq errors in syslog

In the process of diagnosing an Ansible OpenStack multi-node build problem, I came across the following dnsmasq-dhcp errors in syslog. -- snip -- Feb 28 20:25:06 xh3 dnsmasq-dhcp[1956]: not giving name aio1-designate-container-f182826f to the DHCP lease of 10.255.255.226 because the name

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Single core review for patch approval

Has there been any consideration of growing the core team to help with review bandwidth? I ask only because that resulting responsibility to the community can drive additional review activity. Just worried that only 1x +2 could cause issues with code being merged on a project this large that

Re: [openstack-dev] [monasca] cassandra support in Monasca

Hi Pradeep, HPE has investigated the use of Cassandra for Monasca and came to the conclusion that it is not a good choice. One of the problems is that Cassandra is not performant when querying across big data sets with many dimension key-value combinations. As KairosDB is based on Cassandra it

[openstack-dev] [kuryr] 1st day recording for the Virtual Team Gathering

Hi Kuryrs! Thank you all for joining yesterday. For those unable to make it, here are the recordings for the sessions: https://youtu.be/Hdn9LOnCrSc https://youtu.be/6D5iGEkKtGc See you at today's sessions! Toni __

[openstack-dev] [tricircle]weekly meeting of Mar. 1

Hello, team, Before the new weekly meeting is settled, we'll still hold the weekly meeting in regular time slot: UTC 13:00~UTC 14:00 Agenda of Mar. 1 weekly meeting: 1. Pike release schedule: https://releases.openstack.org/pike/schedule.html 2. Launch pad blueprint registration and spec

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Security Worries about Network RBAC

Hello Kevin,Thanks for the prompt response! This is fantastic. I'll throw up a blueprint together tomorrow.Backwards compatibility is the biggest issue, as anyone currently using the feature and assuming no approval step is going to be hit by it. The only sensible solution I can see being easy to

  1   2   >