Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ask.o.o down

2017-01-12 Thread Tom Fifield 

... and at 0700Z it is back ...

On 13/01/17 14:41, Tom Fifield wrote:

As at 2017-01-13 0641Z, Ask.o.o is refusing connections (at least on
IPv4) - tried from a couple of different hosts

fifieldt@docwork2:~$ wget ask.openstack.org
--2017-01-13 06:40:49--  http://ask.openstack.org/
Resolving ask.openstack.org (ask.openstack.org)... 23.253.72.95,
2001:4800:7815:103:be76:4eff:fe05:89f3
Connecting to ask.openstack.org (ask.openstack.org)|23.253.72.95|:80...
failed: Connection refused.

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



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

[OpenStack-Infra] Ask.o.o down

2017-01-12 Thread Tom Fifield 
As at 2017-01-13 0641Z, Ask.o.o is refusing connections (at least on 
IPv4) - tried from a couple of different hosts


fifieldt@docwork2:~$ wget ask.openstack.org
--2017-01-13 06:40:49--  http://ask.openstack.org/
Resolving ask.openstack.org (ask.openstack.org)... 23.253.72.95, 
2001:4800:7815:103:be76:4eff:fe05:89f3
Connecting to ask.openstack.org (ask.openstack.org)|23.253.72.95|:80... 
failed: Connection refused.


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

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [openstack-dev] [neutron] [vpnaas] vpnaas no longer part of the neutron governance

2017-01-12 Thread Takashi Yamamoto 
hi,

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
> Hi
>
> As of today, the project neutron-vpnaas is no longer part of the neutron
> governance. This was a decision reached after the project saw a dramatic
> drop in active development over a prolonged period of time.
>
> What does this mean in practice?
>
> From a visibility point of view, release notes and documentation will no
> longer appear on openstack.org as of Ocata going forward.
> No more releases will be published by the neutron release team.
> The neutron team will stop proposing fixes for the upstream CI, if not
> solely on a voluntary basis (e.g. I still felt like proposing [2]).
>
> How does it affect you, the user or the deployer?
>
> You can continue to use vpnaas and its CLI via the python-neutronclient and
> expect it to work with neutron up until the newton
> release/python-neutronclient 6.0.0. After this point, if you want a release
> that works for Ocata or newer, you need to proactively request a release
> [5], and reach out to a member of the neutron release team [3] for approval.

i want to make an ocata release. (and more importantly the stable branch,
for the benefit of consuming subprojects)
for the purpose, the next step would be ocata-3, right?

> Assuming that the vpnaas CI is green, you can expect to have a working
> vpnaas system upon release of its package in the foreseeable future.
> Outstanding bugs and new bug reports will be rejected on the basis of lack
> of engineering resources interested in helping out in the typical OpenStack
> review workflow.
> Since we are freezing the development of the neutron CLI in favor of the
> openstack unified client (OSC), the lack of a plan to make the VPN commands
> available in the OSC CLI means that at some point in the future the neutron
> client CLI support for vpnaas may be dropped (though I don't expect this to
> happen any time soon).
>
> Can this be reversed?
>
> If you are interested in reversing this decision, now it is time to step up.
> That said, we won't be reversing the decision for Ocata. There is quite a
> curve to ramp up to make neutron-vpnaas worthy of being classified as a
> neutron stadium project, and that means addressing all the gaps identified
> in [6]. If you are interested, please reach out, and I will work with you to
> add your account to [4], so that you can drive the neutron-vpnaas agenda
> going forward.
>
> Please do not hesitate to reach out to ask questions and/or clarifications.
>
> Cheers,
> Armando
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/392010/
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/397924/
> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/150,members
> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/502,members
> [5] https://github.com/openstack/releases
> [6]
> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/stadium/ocata/neutron-vpnaas.html
>
> __
> 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-Infra mailing list
OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [I18n] Regarding Zanata upgrade plan to 3.9.6 with Xenial: Help is needed

2017-01-12 Thread Ian Y. Choi 

Hello,

I would like to summarize the status for Zanata (translation platform) 
upgrade here from various but a little bit scattered results,

and also ask some questions to infra team.

- I18n team completed tests with current Zanata (3.7.3) with Xenial [1], 
but found one error
  mentioned in [2]. It seems that more memory size allocation for 
Zanata with Java 8 is needed.
  Could you upgrade the memory size for translate-dev server first to 
test again?


- I remember that newer version of openstackid needs to be tested with 
translate-dev.
  So I have just uploaded this patch: 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/419667/ .
  I18n team needs more tests, but I think it is a good time to change 
to openstackid-dev for such testing.
  Please ping me after openstackid-dev test with translate-dev is 
completed with no error :)


- On last I18n team meeting, I18n team recognized that the backup would 
be so important.
  Is there more disks for such backup on translate-dev and 
translate.o.o server?
  And the approach implementing like [3] looks quite a good idea I 
think. Thanks, Frank!


- Can I have root access to translate-dev and translate server?


I really appreciate kind and continuous help for such Zanata upgrade, 
but sometimes

I feel that considering priority like in [5] would be also a good idea.
(Or somewhere on i18n-specs, which is not yet revised with items [6]).

Since O cycle is rather short and also StringFreeze period is important 
for I18n team with translations,
it seems that applying new Zanata version into production (I mean, 
translate.openstack.org)
would be difficult. But, I really want to upgrade Zanata 3.9.6 with 
Xenial in translate-dev.openstack.org during O cycle

and hope that all tests will be fine.

Then I would like to have some discussions during PTG event including 
this topic :)



[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/i18n-zanata-test-for-translate-dev
[2] 
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-i18n/2017-January/002643.html

[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/419389/
[4] 
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/system-config/tree/manifests/site.pp#n1416

[5] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/#priority-efforts
[6] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/i18n-specs/


With many thanks,

/Ian

Clark Boylan wrote on 12/8/2016 7:56 AM:

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016, at 01:08 AM, Frank Kloeker wrote:

  - Original Nachricht 
Von: Clark Boylan 
An:  "Ian Y. Choi" , OpenStack Infra

Datum:   03.12.2016 00:37
Betreff: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [I18n] Regarding Zanata upgrade plan to
3.9.6
  with Xenial: Help is needed


On Tue, Nov 22, 2016, at 03:56 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016, at 09:49 AM, Ian Y. Choi wrote:

Hello,

I18n team currently uses Zanata in translate.openstack.org so frequently
as an OpenStack translation platform.
I really appreciate great help from all contributors, especially infra
team members and Zanata development team
:


http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/migrate_to_zana
ta.html

.

Thanks to [1], the current deployed Zanata version is 3.7.3.
During about one year, there were some discussions for Zanata
enhancements in many i18n IRC meetings,
and especially Austin & Barcelona summits [2].
Zanata development team members kindly listen to such enhancements, and
they are actively upgrading Zanata
with fixing bugs and incorporating cool features, which are very helpful
for translators.

One main obstacle for upgrading Zanata (as far as I know) was that newer
versions of Zanata requires Java 8,
but it is not default on Trusty. To upgrade Zanata, upgrading from
Trusty to Xenial for translate.openstack.org is needed
since default-jre-headless on Trusty is Java 7 and Xenial is Java 8.

Recently [3] has been merged, so I really hope that i18n team will see
newer version of Zanata soon :)

I18n team discussed Zanata upgrade with pleia2 and clarkb during i18n
Barcelona meetup (See number 4 in [4]),
and the following is my thoughts on appropriate procedures to support
Zanata latest version
(Currently 3.9.6 - [5]):

1. Xenial OS test for translate-dev.openstack.org
: IMO after tests from infra team, [6] will be changed from "# Node-OS:
trusty" to "# Node-OS: xenial"

2. Using openstackid instead of openstackid-dev for translators to test
translate-dev.o.o
: I uploaded a patch [7].

3. Uploading a patch on openstack-infra/puppet-zanata for Zanata 3.9.6
: [8] is a reference for previous upgrade from Zanata 3.7.2 to 3.7.3

4. translate-dev.o.o with Zanata 3.9.6 will be ready => I18n translators
will test it :)

5. If there will be no error for Zanata 3.9,6, then node upgrade from
Trusty to Xenial and Zanata upgrade to 3.9.6
is needed for translate.openstack.org
: changing [9] line and also proposing a patch similar to [10] will be
needed later.


Since newer version of Zanata is what translators are expecting a lot

:)

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [openstack-dev] [neutron] [vpnaas] vpnaas no longer part of the neutron governance

2017-01-12 Thread Takashi Yamamoto 
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>
> On 27 November 2016 at 20:50, Takashi Yamamoto 
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > As of today, the project neutron-vpnaas is no longer part of the neutron
>> > governance. This was a decision reached after the project saw a dramatic
>> > drop in active development over a prolonged period of time.
>> >
>> > What does this mean in practice?
>> >
>> > From a visibility point of view, release notes and documentation will no
>> > longer appear on openstack.org as of Ocata going forward.
>> > No more releases will be published by the neutron release team.
>> > The neutron team will stop proposing fixes for the upstream CI, if not
>> > solely on a voluntary basis (e.g. I still felt like proposing [2]).
>> >
>> > How does it affect you, the user or the deployer?
>> >
>> > You can continue to use vpnaas and its CLI via the python-neutronclient
>> > and
>> > expect it to work with neutron up until the newton
>> > release/python-neutronclient 6.0.0. After this point, if you want a
>> > release
>> > that works for Ocata or newer, you need to proactively request a release
>> > [5], and reach out to a member of the neutron release team [3] for
>> > approval.
>> > Assuming that the vpnaas CI is green, you can expect to have a working
>> > vpnaas system upon release of its package in the foreseeable future.
>> > Outstanding bugs and new bug reports will be rejected on the basis of
>> > lack
>> > of engineering resources interested in helping out in the typical
>> > OpenStack
>> > review workflow.
>> > Since we are freezing the development of the neutron CLI in favor of the
>> > openstack unified client (OSC), the lack of a plan to make the VPN
>> > commands
>> > available in the OSC CLI means that at some point in the future the
>> > neutron
>> > client CLI support for vpnaas may be dropped (though I don't expect this
>> > to
>> > happen any time soon).
>> >
>> > Can this be reversed?
>> >
>> > If you are interested in reversing this decision, now it is time to step
>> > up.
>> > That said, we won't be reversing the decision for Ocata. There is quite
>> > a
>> > curve to ramp up to make neutron-vpnaas worthy of being classified as a
>> > neutron stadium project, and that means addressing all the gaps
>> > identified
>> > in [6]. If you are interested, please reach out, and I will work with
>> > you to
>> > add your account to [4], so that you can drive the neutron-vpnaas agenda
>> > going forward.
>> >
>> > Please do not hesitate to reach out to ask questions and/or
>> > clarifications.
>>
>> hi,
>>
>> i'm interested in working on the project.
>> well, at least on the parts which is used by networking-midonet.
>
>
> That's great to hear Yamamoto. Since you are already a neutron-core I assume
> you are already intimate with the work required to strengthen the VPNaaS
> project. I have added you to [4] and you can lean on me for any changes that
> needs reviewing.

these fixes for gate jobs need review:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410511/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410530/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/419396/

>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Armando
>> >
>> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/392010/
>> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/397924/
>> > [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/150,members
>> > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/502,members
>> > [5] https://github.com/openstack/releases
>> > [6]
>> >
>> > http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/stadium/ocata/neutron-vpnaas.html
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > 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
>

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

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Announcing Nodepool 0.4.0

2017-01-12 Thread Tobias Henkel 

On 01/11/2017 10:17 PM, James E. Blair wrote:

Hi,

In December we released version 0.3.1 of Nodepool which is the last
version that doesn't use ZooKeeper[1].

Today we're releasing 0.4.0 which includes major changes to the image
building component of Nodepool.  We have been using this in production
for OpenStack for about a month and have been happy with the
performance.  We encourage anyone using Nodepool to begin using this
version now and report any problems.


Hi,

thanks for this great work. I also already switched to the ZooKeeper 
based version a few weeks ago and it works like a charm so far.


Kind regards

Tobias


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