Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] fair standards for all hypervisor drivers

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2014-08-08 09:06:29 -0400 (-0400), Russell Bryant wrote: > [...] >> We've seen several times that building and maintaining 3rd party >> CI is a *lot* of work. > > Building and maintaining *any* CI is a *lot* of work, not the least > of wh

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] The future of the integrated release

On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Michael Still wrote: >> [...] I think an implied side effect of >> the runway system is that nova-drivers would -2 blueprint reviews >> which were not occupying a slot. >> >> (If we start doing more -2'

[openstack-dev] [nova] 9 days until feature proposal freeze

Hi, this is just a friendly reminder that we are now 9 days away from feature proposal freeze for nova. If you think your blueprint isn't going to make it in time, then now would be a good time to let me know so that we can defer it until Kilo. That will free up reviewer time for other blueprints.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy

This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hey > > (Terrible name for a policy, I know) > > From the version_cap saga here

[openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

Hi. One of the action items from the nova midcycle was that I was asked to make nova's expectations of core reviews more clear. This email is an attempt at that. Nova expects a minimum level of sustained code reviews from cores. In the past this has been generally held to be in the order of two c

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy

Actually, thinking on this more -- the lack of consensus is on the attempt to re-add the patch, so I guess we'd handle that just like we do for a contentious patch now. Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Michael Still wrote: > This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concer

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >> On Aug 12, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> >> This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know >> what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] The future of the integrated release

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:26 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >> It seems like this is exactly what the slots give us, though. The core review >> team picks a number of slots indicating how much work they think they can >> actually do (less than the available number of blueprints), and then >> blueprints

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Dan Smith wrote: >> I'm not questioning the value of f2f - I'm questioning the idea of >> doing f2f meetings sooo many times a year. OpenStack is very much >> the outlier here among open source projects - the vast majority of >> projects get along very well with mu

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 08/13/2014 01:09 PM, Dan Smith wrote: >> Expecting cores to be at these sorts of things seems pretty reasonable >> to me, given the usefulness (and gravity) of the discussions we've been >> having so far. Companies with more cores will ha

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Concerns around the Extensible Resource Tracker design - revert maybe?

So, there's been a lot of email in the last few days and I feel I am not keeping up. Sylvain, can you summarise for me what the plan is here? Can we roll forward or do we need to revert? Time is running out for Juno. Thanks, Michael On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:40 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > Le 1

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > Just wanted to quickly weigh in with my thoughts on this important topic. I > very much valued the face-to-face interaction that came from the mid-cycle > meetup in Beaverton (it was the only one I've ever been to). > > That said, I do not belie

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> >> > Just wanted to quickly weigh in with my thoughts on this important >> > topic. I >&

[openstack-dev] Looking for a volunteer to tweak the CSS for planet.openstack.org

Heya, I don't know what other people think, but I think it might be time to clean up the look of planet.openstack.org a little. Is there anyone out there with CSS skills who wants to give doing that a go? Thanks, Michael -- Rackspace Australia ___ Op

[openstack-dev] [nova] Review priorities as we approach juno-3

Hi. We're rapidly approaching j-3, so I want to remind people of the current reviews that are high priority. The definition of high priority I am using here is blueprints that are marked high priority in launchpad that have outstanding code for review -- I am sure there are other reviews that are

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Review priorities as we approach juno-3

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Dan Smith wrote: >> == Move Virt Drivers to use Objects (Juno Work) == >> >> I couldn't actually find any code out for review for this one apart >> from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94477/, is there more out there? > > This was an umbrella one to cover a bunch

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Review priorities as we approach juno-3

I have also been reminded that http://54.201.139.117/nova-bugs.html tracks bugs with outstanding code reviews (click on "ready for review"). There are 179 at the moment, so it sure would be cool to land some bug fixes. Thanks, Michael On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Michael Still w

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Review priorities as we approach juno-3

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 06:53:41AM +1000, Michael Still wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Dan Smith wrote: >> >> == Move Virt Drivers to use Objects (Juno Work) == >> >> >> >> I c

Re: [openstack-dev] Enabling silent Docker tests for Nova?

Agreed. I think this should be in unless infra vetos it for load reasons. Michael On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Dan Smith wrote: >> Feature freeze is only a few weeks away (Sept 4). How about we just >> leave it in experimental until after that big push? That seems pretty >> reasonable. > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [All] LOG.warning/LOG.warn

My recollection is that this was a request from the oslo team, but it was so long ago that I don't recall the details. I think the change is low value, so should only be done when someone is changing the logging in a file already (the log hinting for example). Michael On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 4:2

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] 9 days until feature proposal freeze

s possible. Thanks, Michael On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Michael Still wrote: > Hi, > > this is just a friendly reminder that we are now 9 days away from > feature proposal freeze for nova. If you think your blueprint isn't > going to make it in time, then now would be a good ti

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] Migration from nova-network to Neutron for large production clouds

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > Michael has been posting very informative blogs on the summary of the > mid-cycle meetups for Nova. The one on the Nova Network to Neutron > migration was of particular interest to me as it raises a number of > potential impacts for the CERN pro

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] Migration from nova-network to Neutron for large production clouds

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > > From: Michael Still [mailto:mi...@stillhq.com] > > Sent: 25 August 2014 23:38 > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] Migration fro

[openstack-dev] [nova] Brainstorming summit sessions

Hi, I'd like to start the summit planning process for Paris by asking for people to brain storm a list of topics we might want to cover. We can then prioritize that list and make sure that we address the most important issues. This is a process that worked well for us at the mid-cycle meetup. To

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

For nova we haven't gotten around to doing this, but it shouldn't be a big deal. I'll add it to the agenda for today's meeting. Michael On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Andreas Scheuring wrote: > Hi, > is it already possible to submit specs (nova & neutron) for the K > release? Would be great fo

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Specs for K release

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51:32AM +, Alan Kavanagh wrote: >> How to do we handle specs that have slipped through the cracks >> and did not make it for Juno? > > Rebase the proposal so it is under the 'kilo' directory path > instead

Re: [openstack-dev] [vmware][nova] Refactor reseries rebased

By which John means "generally trying to avoid filling". Michael On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:52 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 2 September 2014 15:27, Matthew Booth wrote: >> We've been playing a game recently between oslo.vmware and the refactor >> series where a patch from the refactor series goe

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] feature branch for Nova v2.1 API?

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > I think it is reasonable to assume that our Juno work is easily capable > of keeping the entire core team 100% busy until Kilo opens. So having > people review v2.1 stuff on a feature branch is definitely going to > impact the work we ge

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Michael will be out of contact tonight

Hi, I'll be on a long haul flight tonight from about 21:00 UTC. So... Once feature freeze happens I'm not ignoring any freeze exceptions, it will just take me a little while to get to them. Michael -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing lis

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

Hi. 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 approved spec * you need three (3) sponsoring cores for an exception

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> Hi. >> >> 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 >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [feature freeze exception] Move to oslo.db

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 wrote: > > > On 9/3/2014 5:08 PM, Andrey Kurilin wrote: >> >> Hi All! >> >> I'd like to ask for a featur

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [feature freeze exception] Feature freeze exception for config-drive-image-property

I'll be the third core here. Approved. @John: can you please remove your -2 from this one? Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/04/2014 03:35 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 09/04/2014 03:07 PM, Jiang, Yunhong wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I'd like to ask for a feature freeze

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [feature freeze exception] FFE for libvirt-start-lxc-from-block-devices

These look good to me, I will be your third core. The middle one has some comments from Jay, but it didn't look like a big deal Approved. @John: can you please remove your -2's on 104048, 74537, and 99974? Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > > > On 09/04/2014 09:25 AM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Brainstorming summit sessions

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Steve Gordon wrote: > Did you have a specific goal/date in mind for when you might start to > finalize this list? I am guessing at least after the dust settles on J-3 and > possibly even the first RCs but just curious. Good question. Looking at the release cale

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [feature freeze exception] Move to oslo.db

Approved. Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Michael Still 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Averting the Nova crisis by splitting out virt drivers

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: [Heavy snipping because of length] > The radical (?) solution to the nova core team bottleneck is thus to > follow this lead and split the nova virt drivers out into separate > projects and delegate their maintainence to new dedicated tea

Re: [openstack-dev] [vmware][nova][FFE] vmware-spawn-refactor

So, that's your three. This exception is approved. Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > 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 >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE request v2-on-v3-api

Approved. Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: > 2014-09-04 20:34 GMT+09:00 Christopher Yeoh : >> 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE request serial-ports

Approved. Michael On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [FFE] Final Libvirt User Namespaces Patch

Approved. Michael On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Matt Dietz wrote: > Thirding sponsorship. > > I didn¹t review as much as the other two, but I helped merge a couple of > the patches. Agreed with Jay otherwise; we¹re almost there, let¹s finish > it. > > -Original Message- > From: Jay Pip

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][FFE] Feature Freeze exception for juno-slaveification

Approved. Michael On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > I am also happy to sponsor it. I've already reviewed the patches... > > On 09/05/2014 04:34 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Mike Wilson > > wrote: >> >> Hi a

[openstack-dev] [Nova] List of granted FFEs

Hi, I've built this handy dandy list of granted FFEs, because searching email to find out what is approved is horrible. It would be good if people with approved FFEs could check their thing is listed here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-nova-approved-ffes Michael -- Rackspace Austra

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][FFE] Feature freeze exception for virt-driver-numa-placement

For better or for worse we have already merged about half of the patches for this series, so I think stopping now because of concerns about CI is pretty arbitrary. I do think Sean's point about scheduler tests outside of tempest is valid though and I'd like to see it reflected in the review comment

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE server-group-quotas

So, this one is looking for one more core. Any takers? Michael On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Day, Phil wrote: > The corresponding Tempest change is also ready to roll (thanks to Ken'inci): > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112474/1 so its kind of just a question of > getting the sequence

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FFE server-group-quotas

Sean > > On 09/05/2014 06:32 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> So, this one is looking for one more core. Any takers? >> >> Michael >> >> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Day, Phil wrote: >>> The corresponding Tempest change is also ready to roll (thanks to

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [feature freeze exception] FFE for libvirt-disk-discard-option

I will be the third here. Approved and added to the etherpad of doom. Michael On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/05/2014 07:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:28:55AM +, Bohai (ricky) wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to ask for a feature fre

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] List of granted FFEs

That's something I'll work on today. Michael On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 12:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Michael Still wrote: >> I've built this handy dandy list of granted FFEs, because searching >> email to find out what is approved is horrible. It would be good i

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] List of granted FFEs

encryption is not on the list of granted FFEs > but I sent an email to John Garbutt yesterday listing > the 3 core sponsors for the FFE. Why was the FFE denied? > > Dan > ________ > From: Michael Still > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2014 5:23 PM

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] List of granted FFEs

confusion but the email outlining the FFE process was not > specific about how sponsors had to register their support, just that there > should be 3 core sponsors. > > Dan > ____ > From: Michael Still > Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2014 4

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [FFE] alternative request for v2-on-v3-api

I didn't put two and two together and come up with three cores here. Sorry for that. This FFE is approved. Michael On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/04/2014 07:54 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: >> On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:08:09 +0900 >> "Ken'ichi Ohmichi" wrote: >> >>> Hi >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise

I haven't had a chance to read other people's posts, so I am sure there is duplication here. What would I have all of OpenStack working on if I was ruler of the universe? Let's see... 1. Fixing our flakey gate: we're all annoyed by our code failing tests with transient errors, but most people jus

[openstack-dev] On an API proxy from baremetal to ironic

Hi. One of the last things blocking Ironic from graduating is deciding whether or not we need a Nova API proxy for the old baremetal extension to new fangled Ironic API. The TC has asked that we discuss whether we think this functionality is actually necessary. It should be noted that we're _not_

Re: [openstack-dev] On an API proxy from baremetal to ironic

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Solly Ross wrote: > With my admittedly limited knowledge of the whole Ironic process, the > question seems to me to be: "If we don't implement a proxy, which people are > going to have a serious problem?" > > Do we have an data on which users/operators are making

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Current state of play for nova FFEs

Hi. So feature freeze seems to be going quite well to me. We've already landed 10 things which had requested exceptions. However, there are still six things in flight, so I would like to remind people to keep focussing on those please. The deadline for these patches to be approved is Friday midni

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron][cinder] Averting the Nova crisis by splitting out virt drivers

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > a) Sorting out the common code is already accounted for in Dan B's original > proposal -- it's a prerequisite for the split. Its a big prerequisite though. I think we're talking about a release worth of work to get that right. I don't object to

[openstack-dev] [Nova] What's holding nova development back?

Just an observation from the last week or so... The biggest problem nova faces at the moment isn't code review latency. Our biggest problem is failing to fix our bugs so that the gate is reliable. The number of rechecks we've done in the last week to try and land code is truly startling. I know t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] What's holding nova development back?

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > Unfortunately the reliability of the gate systems has the highest negative > impact on productivity right at the point in the dev cycle where we need > it to have the least impact too. Agreed. However, my instinct is that a lot of our

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] What's holding nova development back?

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 09/15/2014 05:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:07:13AM +1000, Michael Still wrote: >>> Just an observation from the last week or so... >>> >>> The biggest problem nova f

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] OpenStack bootstrapping hour - Friday Sept 19th - 3pm EST

Sean / Dan / Jay, I just wanted to say that I think this is awesome and I appreciate the effort you're putting into the community. Michael On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > A few of us have decided to pull together a regular (cadence to be > determined) video series taking on

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] What's holding nova development back?

w up for a bug day if we ran one? Michael On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 07:30:26AM +1000, Michael Still wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >> > On 09/15/2014 05:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: &

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Its time to start identifying release critical bugs

Hi. Is time to start identifying (and working on) release critical bugs in nova before we ship RC1. My initial position is that any critical bug is release critical. There are currently critical bugs not targeted to rc1, but that should change in the next day or so. If we're not interested in fix

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] keep old specs

For reference, I proposed a review which does this for nova last night: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/122109/ On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Aaron Rosen wrote: > I agree as well. I think moving them to an unimplemented folder makes sense > and would be helpful in reviewing if one re-proposes

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo final releases ready

I would like to do a python-novaclient release, but this requirements commit hasn't yet turned into a requirements proposal for novaclient (that I can find). Can someone poke that for me? Michael On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > All of the final releases for the Oslo libr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] New API requirements, review of GCE

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 11/19/2013 03:46 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> As long as the metadataservice doesn't move out :) - that one I think >> is pretty core and we have no native replacement [configdrive is not a >> replacement :P]. > > Slightly off tangent threa

Re: [openstack-dev] The recent gate performance and how it affects you

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: > How do we avoid this in the future? Step one is reviewers that are > approving changes (or reverifying them) should keep an eye on the gate > queue. Talking on the -infra IRC channel just now, it has become clear to me that we need to stop a

Re: [openstack-dev] What's Up Doc? Nov 20 2013

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Anne Gentle wrote: > 5. Doc tools updates: > > David Cramer tells me he'll cut one more release of the clouddocs-tools > maven plugin then it'll be put into Gerrit workflow in the OpenStack > organization. Thanks to David and Zaro for the hard work here over many

Re: [openstack-dev] The recent gate performance and how it affects you

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Michael Still wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: > >> How do we avoid this in the future? Step one is reviewers that are >> approving changes (or reverifying them) should keep an eye on the gate >> queue. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to add Matt Riedemann to nova-core

+1 On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Dan Smith wrote: >> Please respond with +1/-1, or any further comments. > > +1 from me -- Matt has been helping a lot lately. > > --Dan > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http:/

Re: [openstack-dev] RFC: Potential to increase min required libvirt version to 0.9.11 ?

Could we push to 1.0.0? That would give us live snapshotting... Michael On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2013-11-20 03:50:03 + (+), Tom Fifield wrote: >> Just confirming that the documentation for Ubuntu sets users up >> with the Cloud Archive. In Havana, Libvi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to re-add Dan Prince to nova-core

+1 On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > Greetings, > > I would like to propose that we re-add Dan Prince to the nova-core > review team. > > Dan Prince has been involved with Nova since early in OpenStack's > history (Bexar timeframe). He was a member of the nova-core review

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [QA] Triaging Bugs during Review

I wonder how hard it would be to add bug information to gerrit to make the state of the bug being fixed more obvious? Just a random idea. Michael On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I tend to follow merges and look for valuable havana backports. A few b

Re: [openstack-dev] creating a default for oslo config variables within a project?

IIRC nova solved this problem by adding a very simple wrapper utility around the oslo call. Couldn't cinder do the same? Michael On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 12/03/2013 06:13 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: >> On 2013-12-03 17:09, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 12/03/2013 05:50 PM, Mark

Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

I like this idea. Michael On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Peter Portante wrote: > Has anybody considered changing how check and gate jobs work such that > the tempest and grenade checks only run once the docs/pep8/unittests > jobs all succeed? > > It seems like they complete so much quicker that

Re: [openstack-dev] Adding DB migration items to the common review checklist

I don't have a problem with any of these requirements, but I'd like to explore automating the checks. Would it be possible to write a unit test that verified this for all migrations? Then we don't need to add it to the checklist... Michael On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] additional core review criteria - recent Jenkins pass - otherwise you break the gates

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19 2013, Sean Dague wrote: > >> So please look for recent passes before +Aing anything. > > What about making that automatic? > > Same question for patchset that stays that for a month, finally got > approved and fails right away

Re: [openstack-dev] [All] tagged commit messages

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:12 AM, John Dickinson wrote: > I've seen several disconnected messages about tags in commit messages. I've > seen > what is possible with the DocImpact tag, and I'd like to have some more > flexible tagging > things too. I'd like to use tags for things like keeping trac

Re: [openstack-dev] [All] tagged commit messages

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:51 AM, John Dickinson wrote: > On Dec 29, 2013, at 2:05 PM, Michael Still wrote: [snip] >> Perhaps step one is to work out what tags we think are useful and at >> what time they should execute? > > I think this is exactly what I don't w

[openstack-dev] Bogus -1 scores from turbo hipster

Hi. The purpose of this email to is apologise for some incorrect -1 review scores which turbo hipster sent out today. I think its important when a third party testing tool is new to not have flakey results as people learn to trust the tool, so I want to explain what happened here. Turbo hipster i

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Turbo-hipster

Hi. So while turbo hipster is new, I've been reading every failure message it produces to make sure its not too badly wrong. There were four failures posted last night while I slept: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64521 This one is a TH bug. We shouldn't be testing

Re: [openstack-dev] [style] () vs \ continuations

On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Joe Gordon wrote: > A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking. > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/ > > > And here is it running against nova: > http://logs.openstack.org/84/64584/1/check/gate-hacking-integration-nova/b31c47e/console.html

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Turbo-hipster

7 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 12/31/2013 3:58 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> So while turbo hipster is new, I've been reading every failure message >> it produces to make sure its not too badly wrong. There were four >> failures p

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Turbo-hipster

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:24 AM, James E. Blair wrote: > However, there are _a lot_ of third-party test systems coming on-line, > and I'm not sure that expanding the "recheck language" to support ever > more complexity is a good idea. I can see how being able to say > "recheck foo" would be usefu

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Turbo-hipster

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: > I'd love to attend this chat, if possible. A number of the coming > on-line third-party test systems are motivated by neutron plugins. I'd > get a lot from hearing this discussion. I've created a BoF on Monday night straight after the CI minico

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Turbo-hipster

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Michael Still wrote: > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:24 AM, James E. Blair wrote: > >> However, there are _a lot_ of third-party test systems coming on-line, >> and I'm not sure that expanding the "recheck language" to support ever >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Bogus -1 scores from turbo hipster

about how it works first. I apologise for this mis-vote. Michael On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:44 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 12/30/2013 6:21 AM, Michael Still wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> The purpose of this email to is apologise for some incorrect -1 review >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][turbo hipster] unable to rebase

Hi! Sorry the slow response. I've been at a conference this week, so I'm a bit behind. I apologise for that. The root cause here is a failure to understand the relatively undocumented git behaviour of zuul. We think we've now got a fix, and will deploy it soon. Michael On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Bogus -1 scores from turbo hipster

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > Another question. This patch [1] failed turbo-hipster after it was approved > but I don't know if that's a gating or just voting job, i.e. should someone > do 'reverify migrations' on that patch or just let it sit and ignore > turbo-hipste

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Bogus -1 scores from turbo hipster

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Sean Dague wrote: [snip] > So instead of trying to fix the individual runs, because t-h runs pretty > fast, can you just fix it with bulk. It seems like the issue in a migration > taking a long time isn't a race in OpenStack, it's completely variability in > the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Bogus -1 scores from turbo hipster

Please note that turbo-hipster currently has -1 voting disabled while we work through these issues. +1 voting is still enabled though. Michael On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Michael Still wrote: > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > > [snip] > >> So instea

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] dependency analysis for graduating more oslo libraries

You mention some concerns with processutils on that wiki page that I was unaware of. I can't find bugs for them either. Do you have any pointers to what is being referred to there? Thanks, Michael On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > I've spent some time over the past day or t

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] dependency analysis for graduating more oslo libraries

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > The notes are from the summit discussion, and I didn't open the bugs. I'll > do that this week. Should I assign them to you? If you assign them to me I will take a look at them. Michael -- Rackspace Australia

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] dependency analysis for graduating more oslo libraries

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > It would be nice to get lockutils graduated to solve some of the issues > mentioned in the oslo.db section, but I believe we do have an outstanding > question regarding its behavior without lock_path being set. I think Clint > was on board with

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev] Third party testing

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:28 AM, John Griffith wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > A while back I started talking about this idea of requiring Cinder > driver contributors to run a super simple cert script (some info here: > [1]). Since then I've been playing with introduction of a third party > gate chec

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev] Third party testing

John -- I agree with you entirely here. My concern is more that I think the CI tests need to run more frequently than weekly. Michael On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:30 AM, John Griffith wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:28 AM, John

Re: [openstack-dev] MariaDB support

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > We are reviewing options between MySQL and MariaDB. RHEL 7 beta seems to > have MariaDB as the default MySQL-like DB. > > > > Can someone summarise the status of the OpenStack in terms of > > > > -What MySQL-flavor is/are currently te

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] nova-network in Icehouse and beyond

On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > So if nova-network doesn't go away this has implications for the V3 API as > it currently doesn't support > nova-network. I'm not sure that we have time to add support for it in > icehouse now, but if nova-network is > not going to go awa

Re: [openstack-dev] Hyper-V Nova CI Infrastructure

I saw another case of the "build succeeded" message for a failure just now... https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59101/ has a rebase failure but was marked as successful. Is this another case of hyper-v not being voting and therefore being a bit confusing? The text of the comment clearly indicates t

Re: [openstack-dev] Hyper-V Nova CI Infrastructure

t; On 02 Feb 2014, at 06:19 , Michael Still wrote: > >> I saw another case of the "build succeeded" message for a failure just >> now... https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59101/ has a rebase failure >> but was marked as successful. >> >> Is this another

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Making periodic tasks config consistent.

On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Matthew Gilliard wrote: > Hello everyone. > > wrt these bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1276203 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1272830 - I'd just like to make sure > that the approach I'm planning makes sense. > > To summarise: Currently there

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >