[openstack-dev] Volunteer for JetBrains License Management

[Andrew Melton]

Hi Devs,


I will be starting a new job in a couple weeks, and as such will be leaving my 
current job and the OpenStack community by the end of this week. That means we 
will need a new representative to manage the Open Source licenses JetBrains has 
given us, and to manage that relationship. So, I am asking if there is anyone 
in the community who would be willing to take this up. In the last year or so 
Jet Brains changed their requirements, and this person will need to be either a 
PTL or a Core developer on an OpenStack project. Please send me a reply if you 
are interested in volunteering for this and we can talk about what it involves.


Thanks!

Andrew
__
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] Volunteer for JetBrains License Management

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,


Thanks again to those who expressed interest in taking this over! I've found a 
Core who was willing to take this over, Swapnil Kulkarni. For JetBrains 
licenses going forward please contact him at 'm...@coolsvap.net'.


Thanks!

Andrew


From: Andrew Melton <andrew.mel...@rackspace.com>
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 11:37 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] Volunteer for JetBrains License Management


Hi Devs,


I will be starting a new job in a couple weeks, and as such will be leaving my 
current job and the OpenStack community by the end of this week. That means we 
will need a new representative to manage the Open Source licenses JetBrains has 
given us, and to manage that relationship. So, I am asking if there is anyone 
in the community who would be willing to take this up. In the last year or so 
Jet Brains changed their requirements, and this person will need to be either a 
PTL or a Core developer on an OpenStack project. Please send me a reply if you 
are interested in volunteering for this and we can talk about what it involves.


Thanks!

Andrew
__
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] New PyCharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,

I now have a set of WebStorm licenses. Please reply with your launchpad-id and 
I'll get you the invitation link for WebStorm.

--Andrew

From: Andrew Melton <andrew.mel...@rackspace.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:43 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Hey Devs,

Reply-All strikes again...

I've had to invalidate the old link. If you still need a PyCharm License, 
please reach out to me with your launchpad-id and I'll get you the updated link.

I'm also working on a WebStorm license. I'll let the list know when I have it.

--Andrew

From: Jim Rollenhagen <j...@jimrollenhagen.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 3:19 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 06:30:30PM +0000, Andrew Melton wrote:
> Please follow this link to request a license: 
> https://account.jetbrains.com/a/4c4ojw.
>
> You will need a JetBrains account to request the license. This link is open 
> for anyone to use, so please do not share it in the public. You may share it 
> with other OpenStack contributors on your team, but if you do, please send me 
> their launchpad-ids. Lastly, if you decide to stop using PyCharm, please send 
> me an email so I can revoke the license and open it up for use by someone 
> else.

Welp, it's in the public now. :(

// jim

__
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

__
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

__
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] New PyCharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,

Reply-All strikes again...

I've had to invalidate the old link. If you still need a PyCharm License, 
please reach out to me with your launchpad-id and I'll get you the updated link.

I'm also working on a WebStorm license. I'll let the list know when I have it.

--Andrew

From: Jim Rollenhagen <j...@jimrollenhagen.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 3:19 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 06:30:30PM +, Andrew Melton wrote:
> Please follow this link to request a license: 
> https://account.jetbrains.com/a/4c4ojw.
>
> You will need a JetBrains account to request the license. This link is open 
> for anyone to use, so please do not share it in the public. You may share it 
> with other OpenStack contributors on your team, but if you do, please send me 
> their launchpad-ids. Lastly, if you decide to stop using PyCharm, please send 
> me an email so I can revoke the license and open it up for use by someone 
> else.

Welp, it's in the public now. :(

// jim

__
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

__
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

[openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Hi devs,


I've got the new license for the next year. As always, please reply to this 
email with your launchpad-id if you would like a license.


Also, if there are other JetBrains products you use to contribute to OpenStack, 
please let me know and I will request licenses.

?

--Andrew
__
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] New PyCharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Please follow this link to request a license: 
https://account.jetbrains.com/a/4c4ojw.

You will need a JetBrains account to request the license. This link is open for 
anyone to use, so please do not share it in the public. You may share it with 
other OpenStack contributors on your team, but if you do, please send me their 
launchpad-ids. Lastly, if you decide to stop using PyCharm, please send me an 
email so I can revoke the license and open it up for use by someone else.

Thanks!
Andrew

From: Kekane, Abhishek <abhishek.kek...@nttdata.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:10 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Hi Andrew,

My launchpad id is abhishek-kekane

Thank you,

Abhishek

From: Andrew Melton [andrew.mel...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:54 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Hi devs,


I've got the new license for the next year. As always, please reply to this 
email with your launchpad-id if you would like a license.


Also, if there are other JetBrains products you use to contribute to OpenStack, 
please let me know and I will request licenses.

​

--Andrew


__
Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest confidence
for the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged,
confidential, and proprietary data. If you are not the intended recipient,
please advise the sender by replying promptly to this email and then delete
and destroy this email and any attachments without any further use, copying
or forwarding.
__
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
__
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] New PyCharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Please follow this link to request a license: 
https://account.jetbrains.com/a/4c4ojw.

You will need a JetBrains account to request the license. This link is open for 
anyone to use, so please do not share it in the public. You may share it with 
other OpenStack contributors on your team, but if you do, please send me their 
launchpad-ids. Lastly, if you decide to stop using PyCharm, please send me an 
email so I can revoke the license and open it up for use by someone else.

Thanks!
Andrew

From: Henry Fourie <louis.fou...@huawei.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:50 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Andrew,
   My launchpad id is lfourie
 - Louis

-Original Message-
From: Kekane, Abhishek [mailto:abhishek.kek...@nttdata.com]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:10 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Hi Andrew,

My launchpad id is abhishek-kekane

Thank you,

Abhishek

From: Andrew Melton [andrew.mel...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:54 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] New PyCharm License

Hi devs,


I've got the new license for the next year. As always, please reply to this 
email with your launchpad-id if you would like a license.


Also, if there are other JetBrains products you use to contribute to OpenStack, 
please let me know and I will request licenses.

​

--Andrew


__
Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest confidence for 
the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged, confidential, 
and proprietary data. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise the 
sender by replying promptly to this email and then delete and destroy this 
email and any attachments without any further use, copying or forwarding.
__
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
__
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
__
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] Pycharm License for OpenStack developers

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,


I'm the guy who's maintained our JetBrains licenses for the past couple of 
years. License philosophy aside, the IDE you choose to use is entirely up to 
you. I'm currently waiting to hear back from JetBrains on the actual license. 
From the sound of it, the opensource license hasn't changed much since last 
year. Originally we had an unlimited license, which made user management 
easier. This year it sounds like we will still have a bulk license, they just 
want an estimation for an initial user count limit, which I've given them. 
They've assured me that we will be able to increase the user limit on the 
license if we hit it.


Once I have the new license, I'll send out an email to the list letting 
everyone know. Please hold off on license requests until then. Unless JetBrains 
demands more strict control, I'll handle everything like I always have. I'll 
just need your launchpad-id to confirm you're actually a contributor, then I'll 
send the license your way.


--Andrew


From: John Griffith 
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 3:06 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Pycharm License for OpenStack developers



On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Morgan Fainberg 
> wrote:


On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Joshua Harlow 
> wrote:
Anyone know about the impact of:

- https://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2015/09/04/jetbrains-lockin-we-told-you-so/

- http://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/03/introducing-jetbrains-toolbox/

I'm pretty sure a lot of openstack-devs are using pycharms, and wonder what 
this change will mean for those devs?

I have historically purchased my own license (because I believed in supporting 
the companies that produce the tools, even though there was a oss-project 
license that I didn't need to pay for).
?Total tangent, but props on purchasing a license to support something you use 
on a regular basis!
?

I am evaluating if I wish to continue with jetbrains based on this change or 
not. They have said they are evaluating the feedback - I'm willing to see what 
the end result will be.

There are other IDE options out there for python and I may consider those. I 
haven't run out my license, I am not sure this is enough to change my POV that 
pycharm is the best option at the moment for my workflow. It was for other 
software I historically purchased (business suites/photo editing) but those 
filled a different space.

How much impact will this make to those pure upstream developers? Very little 
unless jetbrains ceases the opensource project license.

Just my $0.02.

--Morgan


__
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


__
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] [magnum] Discovery

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Daneyon,


I'm fairly partial towards #2 as well. Though, I'm wondering if it's possible 
to take it a step further. Could we run etcd in each Bay without using the 
public discovery endpoint? And then, configure Swarm to simply use the internal 
ectd as it's discovery mechanism? This could cut one of our external service 
dependencies and make it easier to run Magnum is an environment with locked 
down public internet access.?


Anyways, I think #2 could be a good start that we could iterate on later if 
need be.


--Andrew



From: Daneyon Hansen (danehans) 
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 11:26 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Discovery

All,

While implementing the flannel --network-driver for swarm, I have come across 
an issue that requires feedback from the community. Here is the breakdown of 
the issue:

  1.  Flannel [1] requires etcd to store network configuration. Meeting this 
requirement is simple for the kubernetes bay types since kubernetes requires 
etcd.
  2.  A discovery process is needed for bootstrapping etcd. Magnum implements 
the public discovery option [2].
  3.  A discovery process is also required to bootstrap a swarm bay type. 
Again, Magnum implements a publicly hosted (Docker Hub) option [3].
  4.  Magnum API exposes the discovery_url attribute that is leveraged by swarm 
and etcd discovery.
  5.  Etcd can not be implemented in swarm because discovery_url is associated 
to swarm's discovery process and not etcd.

Here are a few options on how to overcome this obstacle:

  1.  Make the discovery_url more specific, for example etcd_discovery_url and 
swarm_discovery_url. However, this option would needlessly expose both 
discovery url's to all bay types.
  2.  Swarm supports etcd as a discovery backend. This would mean discovery is 
similar for both bay types. With both bay types using the same mechanism for 
discovery, it will be easier to provide a private discovery option in the 
future.
  3.  Do not support flannel as a network-driver for k8s bay types. This would 
require adding support for a different driver that supports multi-host 
networking such as libnetwork. Note: libnetwork is only implemented in the 
Docker experimental release: 
https://github.com/docker/docker/tree/master/experimental.

I lean towards #2 but their may be other options, so feel free to share your 
thoughts. I would like to obtain feedback from the community before proceeding 
in a particular direction.

[1] https://github.com/coreos/flannel
[2] 
https://github.com/coreos/etcd/blob/master/Documentation/discovery_protocol.md
[3] https://docs.docker.com/swarm/discovery/

Regards,
Daneyon Hansen
__
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

[openstack-dev] [magnum] Discovery Mechanism For Swarm Bay

[Andrew Melton]

Hi Devs,


I'd like to get some discussion going for possible improvements to the

discovery mechanism used in Magnum's Swarm bay.


The method of the existing review[1] is to use the public swarm discovery

endpoint, and let the user pass a token in on the bay-create call. This is

definitely not ideal for a couple reasons. First, it requires the user to go

out and request that token themselves. Secondly, it relies on having

access to the internet and public swarm discovery endpoint.


Solving the first issue is fairly simple, the TemplateDefinition could request

the token just like the CoreOS TemplateDefinition does. That still requires

not only Magnum but also all of the instances in the Bay have access to the

public discovery endpoint. I still think this option has some merit for some

cases, how many of our users will be running their bays in isolation without

access to Docker's public services (registry/hub/discovery).


Solving the second issue is going to be a bit more complex. Swarm does

provide multiple alternatives to public token based discovery [2]. These

revolve around either static lists of hosts, or around other configuration

services like etcd. Static lists of hosts is going to make growing or shrinking

bays a real pain. I think the best option here is to go with a configuration

service.


Configuration services present their own issues. Should each bay host it's

own service, similar to how we're doing for the swarm manager and agents.

Or, should it be up to the operator to run a global configuration service and

each bay will use some unique ID (Bay UUID  may work here) for discovery.

Running a service inside each bay will likely require a different template for

each type of service, and will add more services to each Bay that may need

to be maintained. Due to that, the simpler solution may be to rely on the

operator to run a global service.


Anyways, any thoughts here will be greatly appreciated!


Thanks!

Andrew

?

[1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/174112

[2]: https://github.com/docker/swarm/blob/master/discovery/README.md?
__
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] [magnum] How to use docker-swarm bay in magnum

[Andrew Melton]

???Hi Jay,


Magnum Bays do not currently use the docker-swarm template. I'm working on a 
patch to add support for the docker-swarm template. That is going to require a 
new TemplateDefinition, and potentially some new config options and/or 
Bay/BayModel parameters. After that, the Docker container conductor will need 
to be updated to pull it's connection string from the Bay instead of the


To answer your main question though, the idea is that once users can build a 
docker-swarm bay, they will use the container endpoints of our API to interact 
with the bay.


--Andrew


From: Jay Lau jay.lau@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:33 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [magnum] How to use docker-swarm bay in magnum

Greetings,

Currently, there is a docker-swarm bay in magnum, but the problem is after this 
swarm bay was created, how to let user use this bay? Still using swarm CLI? The 
magnum do not have API/CLI to interact with swarm bay now.

--
Thanks,

Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
__
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

[openstack-dev] JetBrains WebStorm License Available

[Andrew Melton]

Hi Devs,


Some interest was expressed in a WebStorm license for some of the OpenStack 
projects

that now include some JavaScript. I reached out to JetBrains and they have 
provided us

with a license for WebStorm along side our existing PyCharm license.


As with the PyCharm license, I can't post it directly to the mailing list. So, 
if you would like

to use WebStorm, please send me a reply including your full name and 
launchpad-id.?


Thanks!

Andrew Melton
__
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] [Magnum] Scheduling for Magnum

[Andrew Melton]

I think Sylvain is getting at an important point. Magnum is trying to be as 
agnostic as possible when it comes to selecting a backend. Because of that, I 
think the biggest benefit to Magnum would be a generic scheduling interface 
that each pod type would implement. A pod type with a backend providing 
scheduling could implement a thin scheduler that simply translates the generic 
requests into something the backend can understand. And a pod type requiring 
outside scheduling could implement something more heavy.

If we are careful to keep the heavy scheduling generic enough to be shared 
between backends requiring it, we could hopefully swap in an implementation 
using Gantt once that is ready.

--Andrew


From: Jay Lau [jay.lau@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 4:36 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Scheduling for Magnum

Thanks Sylvain, we did not work out the API requirement till now but I think 
the requirement should be similar with nova: we need select_destination to 
select the best target host based on filters and weights.

There are also some discussions here 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/magnum-scheduler-for-docker

Thanks!

2015-02-09 16:22 GMT+08:00 Sylvain Bauza 
sba...@redhat.commailto:sba...@redhat.com:
Hi Magnum team,


Le 07/02/2015 19:24, Steven Dake (stdake) a écrit :


From: Eric Windisch e...@windisch.usmailto:e...@windisch.us
Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 10:09 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Scheduling for Magnum


1) Cherry pick scheduler code from Nova, which already has a working a filter 
scheduler design.

The Gantt team explored that option by the Icehouse cycle and it failed with a 
lot of problems. I won't list all of those, but I'll just explain that we 
discovered how the Scheduler and the Nova compute manager were tighly coupled, 
which was meaning that a repository fork was really difficult to do without 
reducing the tech debt.

That said, our concerns were far different from the Magnum team : it was about 
having feature parity and replacing the current Nova scheduler, while your team 
is just saying that they want to have something about containers.


2) Integrate swarmd to leverage its scheduler[2].

I see #2 as not an alternative but possibly an also. Swarm uses the Docker 
API, although they're only about 75% compatible at the moment. Ideally, the 
Docker backend would work with both single docker hosts and clusters of Docker 
machines powered by Swarm. It would be nice, however, if scheduler hints could 
be passed from Magnum to Swarm.

Regards,
Eric Windisch

Adrian  Eric,

I would prefer to keep things simple and just integrate directly with swarm and 
leave out any cherry-picking from Nova. It would be better to integrate 
scheduling hints into Swarm, but I’m sure the swarm upstream is busy with 
requests and this may be difficult to achieve.


I don't want to give my opinion about which option you should take as I don't 
really know your needs. If I understand correctly, this is about having a 
scheduler providing affinity rules for containers. Do you have a document 
explaining which interfaces you're looking for, which kind of APIs you're 
wanting or what's missing with the current Nova scheduler ?

MHO is that the technology shouldn't drive your decision : whatever the backend 
is (swarmd or an inherited nova scheduler), your interfaces should be the same.

-Sylvain


Regards
-steve




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



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




--
Thanks,

Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
__
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] pycharm license?

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,

I just got clarification on what it was meant by 'commercial developer.' If 
developer participates in commercial consulting, develops commercial per-order 
customization / implementation for OpenStack (if any) – they are considered a 
commercial developer.

As long as you do not meet those criteria, I can provide you the key. To 
request the key from me, please send me the name of the company you work for 
(if applicable) and your launchpad id.

Thanks again,
Andrew Melton

From: Andrew Melton [andrew.mel...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 3:12 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi Devs,

I have the new license, but it has some new restrictions on it's use. I am 
still waiting on some clarification, but I do know some situations in which I 
can distribute the license.

I cannot distribute the license to any commercial developers. This means if as 
part of your job, you are contributing to OpenStack, and if the company you 
work for provides paid services, support, or training relating to OpenStack, I 
cannot provide you the license.

If you meet those criteria (I know I do), you are now required to have a 
commercial license. I'm sure quite a few of us now meet this criteria and are 
without a license. Another alternative is the free Community Edition.

If you do not meet those criteria, I can provide you with the license. To 
request the license, please send me an email with your name, the company you 
work for (if applicable), and your launchpad id. If you are unsure of your 
situation, it may be best to hold off until I hear back from Jetbrains.

Lastly, as part of Jetbrains granting us this new license, they have asked if 
anyone would be willing to write a review. If anyone would like to do that, 
please let me know.

Thanks,
Andrew Melton

From: Andrew Melton [andrew.mel...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 3:19 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi Devs,

I'm working on the new license, but it is taking longer than it normally does 
as Jetbrains is requiring some new steps to get the license. I'll send out an 
update when I have it, but until then we'll just have to deal with the pop-ups 
on start. If I'm remembering correctly, a new license simple grants access to 
newer versions, current versions should still work.

Thanks for your patience,
Andrew Melton

From: Manickam, Kanagaraj [kanagaraj.manic...@hp.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:20 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi,

Does anyone has pycharm license for openstack project development? Thanks.

Regards
Kanagaraj M
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

[Andrew Melton]

Hi Devs,

I have the new license, but it has some new restrictions on it's use. I am 
still waiting on some clarification, but I do know some situations in which I 
can distribute the license.

I cannot distribute the license to any commercial developers. This means if as 
part of your job, you are contributing to OpenStack, and if the company you 
work for provides paid services, support, or training relating to OpenStack, I 
cannot provide you the license.

If you meet those criteria (I know I do), you are now required to have a 
commercial license. I'm sure quite a few of us now meet this criteria and are 
without a license. Another alternative is the free Community Edition.

If you do not meet those criteria, I can provide you with the license. To 
request the license, please send me an email with your name, the company you 
work for (if applicable), and your launchpad id. If you are unsure of your 
situation, it may be best to hold off until I hear back from Jetbrains.

Lastly, as part of Jetbrains granting us this new license, they have asked if 
anyone would be willing to write a review. If anyone would like to do that, 
please let me know.

Thanks,
Andrew Melton

From: Andrew Melton [andrew.mel...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 3:19 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi Devs,

I'm working on the new license, but it is taking longer than it normally does 
as Jetbrains is requiring some new steps to get the license. I'll send out an 
update when I have it, but until then we'll just have to deal with the pop-ups 
on start. If I'm remembering correctly, a new license simple grants access to 
newer versions, current versions should still work.

Thanks for your patience,
Andrew Melton

From: Manickam, Kanagaraj [kanagaraj.manic...@hp.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:20 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi,

Does anyone has pycharm license for openstack project development? Thanks.

Regards
Kanagaraj M
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

[Andrew Melton]

Hi Devs,

I'm working on the new license, but it is taking longer than it normally does 
as Jetbrains is requiring some new steps to get the license. I'll send out an 
update when I have it, but until then we'll just have to deal with the pop-ups 
on start. If I'm remembering correctly, a new license simple grants access to 
newer versions, current versions should still work.

Thanks for your patience,
Andrew Melton

From: Manickam, Kanagaraj [kanagaraj.manic...@hp.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:20 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi,

Does anyone has pycharm license for openstack project development? Thanks.

Regards
Kanagaraj M
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

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

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,

I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for: 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94915/

This feature is the final patch set for the User Namespace BP 
(https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-lxc-user-namespaces). This 
is an important feature for libvirt-lxc because in greatly increases the 
security of running libvirt-lxc based containers. The code for this feature has 
been up for a couple months now and has had plenty of time to go through 
review. The code itself is solid by now and functionally it hasn't changed much 
in the last month or so. Lastly, the only thing holding up the patch from 
merging this week was a multitude of bugs in the gate.

Thanks,
Andrew Melton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] New Pycharm License

[Andrew Melton]

Hey Devs,
 
It's almost been a year since I sent out the first email and I've been getting 
a few emails lately about alerts that the current license is about to expire. 
Well, I've got a hold of our new license, good for another year. This'll give 
you access to the new Pro edition of Pycharm and any updates for a year.
 
As this list is public, I can't email the license out to everyone, so please 
reply to this email and I'll get you the license.
 
Also, please note that if your current license expires, Pycharm will continue 
to work. You will just stop receiving updates until you've entered this new 
license.
 
Thanks,
Andrew Melton___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] [ceilometer] Periodic Auditing In Glance

[Andrew Melton]

 I'm just concerned with the type of notification you'd send. It has to
 be enough fine grained so we don't lose too much information.

It's a tough situation, sending out an image.exists for each image with
the same payload as say image.upload would likely create TONS of traffic.
Personally, I'm thinking about a batch payload, with a bare minimum of the
following values:

'payload': [{'id': 'uuid1', 'owner': 'tenant1', 'created_at': 'some_date',
'size': 1},
   {'id': 'uuid2', 'owner': 'tenant2', 'created_at':
'some_date', 'deleted_at': 'some_other_date', 'size': 2}]

That way the audit job/task could be configured to emit in batches which
a deployer could tweak the settings so as to not emit too many messages.
I definitely welcome other ideas as well.

Thanks,
Andrew Melton


On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 12 2013, Andrew Melton wrote:

  So, my question to the Ceilometer community is this, does this sound like
  something Ceilometer would find value in and use? If so, would this be
  something
  we would want most deployers turning on?

 Yes. I think we would definitely be happy to have the ability to drop
 our pollster at some time.
 I'm just concerned with the type of notification you'd send. It has to
 be enough fine grained so we don't lose too much information.

 --
 Julien Danjou
 // Free Software hacker / freelance consultant
 // http://julien.danjou.info

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [glance] [ceilometer] Periodic Auditing In Glance

[Andrew Melton]

I'd like to open a discussion about bringing periodic auditing
to Glance. This would be very similar to Nova's instance usage audit,
which emits compute.instance.exists events for each instance that was
active for the given period. Likewise, Glance would emit an image.exists
for any image which was or is active for the given period.

As Ceilometer is the largest consumer of notifications in Openstack,
we'd really like to have their input on this.

Ceilometer is currently moving from a pulling/polling approach to a
push/notification based approach. The image.exists notification would be
useful for the 'image' metric seen in their docs here:

http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ceilometer/measurements.html#image-glance

Currently that meter tracks if the image (still) exists, and it does this
by setting the Gauge to 1 every time it gets a notification for the image.
The benefit of using a periodic image.exists notification for this meter
is that it would regularly get updated to ensure that the image is actually
still around.

As for Rackspace, the value we see in periodic image.exists is that it
provides a secondary way to identify usage. Currently, if you want to
track image usage using notifications, you must rely on instantaneous
notifications like image.create and image.delete. Going with those
notifications you'd bill for a given image until you receive an
image.delete. One issue that could arise would be a dropped image.delete.
Given that case, that image would be billed for indefinitely. With a
combination of instantaneous and periodic notification, you can detect
dropped notifications and in this case, a billing system using both
notifications would not end up over billing by charging for that image.

So, my question to the Ceilometer community is this, does this sound like
something Ceilometer would find value in and use? If so, would this be
something
we would want most deployers turning on?

Thanks,
Andrew Melton
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev