Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Jay Bryant wrote: > I had forgotten that we added this and am guessing that other cores did as > well. As a result, it likely, was not enforced in driver reviews. > > I need to better understand the benefit. In don't think there is a

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Eric Harney wrote: > On 06/02/2017 03:47 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > Hey Everyone, > > > > So quite a while back we introduced a new model for dealing with target > > management in the drivers (ie initialize_connection, ensure_export etc). > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

I had forgotten that we added this and am guessing that other cores did as well. As a result, it likely, was not enforced in driver reviews. I need to better understand the benefit. In don't think there is a hurry to remove this right now. Can we put it on the agenda for Denver? Jay On Fri, Jun

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

On 06/02/2017 03:47 PM, John Griffith wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > So quite a while back we introduced a new model for dealing with target > management in the drivers (ie initialize_connection, ensure_export etc). > > Just to summarize a bit: The original model was that all of the target >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:47 PM, John Griffith wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > So quite a while back we introduced a new model for dealing with target > management in the drivers (ie initialize_connection, ensure_export etc). > > Just to summarize a bit: The original model

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] rh1 issues post-mortem

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 03/28/2017 05:01 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > >> Final (hopefully) update: >> >> All active compute nodes have been rebooted and things seem to be stable >> again. Jobs are even running a little faster, so I'm thinking

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] rh1 issues post-mortem

On 03/28/2017 05:01 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: Final (hopefully) update: All active compute nodes have been rebooted and things seem to be stable again. Jobs are even running a little faster, so I'm thinking this had a detrimental effect on performance too. I've set a reminder for about two

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Migrate Off Paste

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > I don't think the maintenance issue is the prime motivator, it's the fact > paste is in /etc which makes it a config file and therefore an impediment > to smooth upgrades. The more we can move into code, like default

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Move policy and policy docs into code

On 6/1/2017 12:54 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: Hi all, I've proposed a community-wide goal for Queens to move policy into code and supply documentation for each policy [0]. I've included references to existing documentation and specifications completed by various projects and attempted to lay

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] rdo and tripleo container builds and CI

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Attila Darazs wrote: > If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the > discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: > > Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC > Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ > > Full minutes:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Migrate Off Paste

On 6/2/2017 1:14 PM, Clay Gerrard wrote: Can we make this (at least) two (community?) goals? #1 Make a thing that is not paste that is better than paste (i.e. > works, ie >= works & is maintained) #2 Have some people/projects "migrate" to it If the goal is just "take over paste maintenance"

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:47 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > > What I'm wondering is, even though I certainly think this is a FAR > SUPERIOR design to what we had, I don't like having both code-paths and > designs in the code base. > Might be useful to enumerate those?

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

I personally agree that the target classes route is a much cleaner and more efficient way of doing it. Also, that it doesn't make sense to have all the code duplication to support doing it both ways. If other people agree with that- maybe we can start with not taking new drivers that do it the

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Target classes in Cinder

Hey Everyone, So quite a while back we introduced a new model for dealing with target management in the drivers (ie initialize_connection, ensure_export etc). Just to summarize a bit: The original model was that all of the target related stuff lived in a base class of the base drivers. Folks

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Migrate Off Paste

Can we make this (at least) two (community?) goals? #1 Make a thing that is not paste that is better than paste (i.e. > works, ie >= works & is maintained) #2 Have some people/projects "migrate" to it If the goal is just "take over paste maintenance" that's maybe ok - but is that an "OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Onboarding rooms postmortem, what did you do, what worked, lessons learned

Hello Everyone :) So I just want to summarize the successes and improvement points people have brought so that we can make the next round of onboarding an even bigger success! What worked: - Having material prepared ahead of time that is more interactive to get people involved

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Status update, Jun 2

Sean McGinnis wrote: >> >> == Need for a TC meeting next Tuesday == >> >> Based on past discussions, we'll call a meeting on Jun 6 at 20:00 UTC on >> #openstack-meeting to specifically discuss the postgresql question, >> hopefully unblocking the situation and defining a path forward. I'm >>

[openstack-dev] [release][infra][python3] how to handle release tools for python 3

As we discussed in the team meeting today, I have filed reviews to add a Python 3.5 unit test job to the release-tools repository: https://review.openstack.org/470350 update semver module for python 3.5 https://review.openstack.org/470352 add python 3.5 unit test job for release-tools

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 22) - Promotion Problems

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting = CI Promotion problems = The

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ops] OpenStack Days UK 2017 - Call for speakers

Hello! Organisation of the next edition of OpenStack Days UK is in full swing, and in case you missed the announcement, the event is to be held in Central London (Bishopsgate) on the 26th of September. Full details are on the website: https://openstackdays.uk At

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Supporting volume_type when booting from volume

On 6/2/2017 12:40 AM, 한승진 wrote: Hello, stackers I am just curious about the results of lots of discussions on the below blueprint. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-volume-type-with-bdm-parameter Can I ask what the concolusion is?

[openstack-dev] [nova] placement/resource providers update 25

Placement update 25. Only 75 more to reach 100. # What Matters Most Claims against the placement API remain the highest priority. There's plenty of other work in progress too which needs to advance. Lots of links within. # What's Changed The entire shared resource providers stack has

Re: [openstack-dev] [masakari] Intrusive Instance Monitoring

Hey Sam, Just FYI ... I have updated the intrusive-instance-monitoring spec based on comments received from Adam and Vikash. Greg. From: Sam P Reply-To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 8:12 AM To:

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] tempest failures when deploying neutron-server in wsgi with apache

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Morales, Victor wrote: > Hi Emilien, > > I noticed that the configuration file was created using puppet. I submitted > a patch[1] that was targeting to include the changes in Devstack. My major > concern is with the value of

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

> -Original Message- > From: Sean McGinnis [mailto:sean.mcgin...@gmx.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 4:48 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) d...@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests >

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

Excerpts from Matthew Treinish's message of 2017-06-01 20:51:24 -0400: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:57:00AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-06-01 11:51:50 +0200: > > > Graham Hayes wrote: > > > > On 01/06/17 01:30, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

O I like your thinking – I’m a pandoc fan, so, I’d be interested in moving this along using any tools to make it easier. I think my only proviso (now I’m thinking about it more) is that we still have a link on docs.o.o, but it goes to the wiki page for the Ops Guide. From: Anne Gentle

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Status update, Jun 2

> > == Need for a TC meeting next Tuesday == > > Based on past discussions, we'll call a meeting on Jun 6 at 20:00 UTC on > #openstack-meeting to specifically discuss the postgresql question, > hopefully unblocking the situation and defining a path forward. I'm > traveling on that day, so I'd

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

I'm okay with option 3. Since we hadn't heard from anyone yet who can do the work, I thought I'd describe a super small experiment to try. If you're interested in the export, run an experiment with Pandoc to convert from RST to Mediawiki. http://pandoc.org/demos.html You'll likely still have

[openstack-dev] [IGNORE] Test Mail

-- Best Regards, NPS __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuxi][kuryr] Where to commit codes for Fuxi-golang

Hi Hongbin. Regarding your comments below, some quick clarifications for people less familiar with Magnum. 1. Rexray / Cinder integration - Magnum uses an alpine based rexray image, compressed size is 33MB (the download size), so pretty good - Deploying a full Magnum cluster of 128 nodes takes

[openstack-dev] [tc] Status update, Jun 2

Hi! This new regular email will give you an update on the status of a number of TC-proposed governance changes, in an attempt to rely less on a weekly meeting to convey that information. You can find the full status list of open topics at:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][ptls][all] Potential Queens Goal: Move policy and policy docs into code

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > Hi all, > > I've proposed a community-wide goal for Queens to move policy into code and > supply documentation for each policy [0]. I've included references to > existing documentation and specifications completed by

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][DevStack][Neutron] devstack install - need help on local.conf settings

Hi Nidhi, Try this : *Set up the network environment on the host so that devstack VMs can access the external world.* *sudo bash* *echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward* *echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/INTERFACE/proxy_arp* *iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o INTERFACE -j MASQUERADE* *These

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][DevStack][Neutron] devstack install - need help on local.conf settings

Hello all, I am using http://paste.openstack.org/show/595339/ as my local.conf. I wanted to understand :- Which interface should we put as value in PUBLIC_INTERFACE in local.conf. Reason why I am asking this is, Once, I installed OpenStack using DevStack, on my linux VM on VirtualBox - I used

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptg] Strawman Queens PTG week slicing

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Thierry Carrez wrote: >> In a previous thread[1] I introduced the idea of moving the PTG from a >> purely horizontal/vertical week split to a more >> inter-project/intra-project activities split, and the initial

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] [tc] [all] more tempest plugins (was Re: [tc] [all] TC Report 22)

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:09:56AM +0100, Chris Dent wrote: A lot of this results, in part, from there being no single guiding pattern and principle for how (and where) the tests are to be managed. It sounds like you want to write a general testing

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [dev] [doc] Operations Guide future

Blair – correct, it was the majority in the room. I just wanted to reach out and ensure that operators had a chance to voice opinions and see where we were going ( Sounds like option 3 is still the favorable direction. This is going to be a really big exercise, lifting the content out of the

[openstack-dev] [release] Release countdown for week R-12, June 05-09

Welcome to our regular release countdown email! Development Focus - Teams should be wrapping up Pike-2 work. Actions --- Next week is the Pike-2 deadline for cycle-with-milestones projects. That means that before EOD on Thursday, all milestone-driven projects should propose

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][Blazar] steps to big-tent project

Masahito MUROI wrote: > Blazar team is thinking to push a request about adding Blazar project > into the OpenStack BigTent. > > Based on documents in the governance repository[1], what the team is > required to do for the request is just adding project's definition to > references/projects.yaml.

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tc][all] Tempest to reject trademark tests

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017, at 09:51 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:57:00AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-06-01 11:51:50 +0200: > > > Graham Hayes wrote: > > > > On 01/06/17 01:30, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > >> TBH, it's a bit

[openstack-dev] [tc][Blazar] steps to big-tent project

Dear TC team, Blazar team is thinking to push a request about adding Blazar project into the OpenStack BigTent. Based on documents in the governance repository[1], what the team is required to do for the request is just adding project's definition to references/projects.yaml. Is there

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][horizon] FWaaS/VPNaaS dashboard split out from horizon

Thanks Akihiro. From an FWaaS perspective, in agreement with Takashi on points below. On repository name, I am not religious as long as we keep things consistent. Thanks Sridar On 6/1/17, 12:59 AM, "Takashi Yamamoto" wrote: >On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Akihiro