Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Colorado release pipeline
Uli, I looked at the page again and added some detail around the process for stable branch creation. Also, I noticed that you said that cherry-picking should be done from master to branch, but I think it's the other way around, isn't it? Bug fixes should be applied to the branch, then cherry-picked to master, right? David On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Uli, > > Thanks for updating the page. Looks good. > > David > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Ulrich Kleber <ulrich.kle...@huawei.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I updated the release pipeline description in the wiki and created a link >> from colorado release page. >> >> Please have a look. >> >> Chris, please reserve some time in the TSC meeting tomorrow. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Uli >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] Asia / Pacific release meeting begins TODAY
Team, Today (Feb 7) is the first Asia / Pacific release meeting. This meeting is intended to help APAC OPNFV members that have a difficult time attending the regular weekly release meeting due to time zone differences. The meeting will be held every other Tuesday at 7:30-8:00 p.m. (PST - 11:30 a.m. in Beijing). The meeting will be IRC only. The meeting logistics are here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8690599>. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status
Team, There seems to be some misunderstanding about the Danube release status. I've had people email me with comments about continuing to integrate with other scenarios or installers, or enabling additional features, etc. To be clear, we are past Milestone 5, which means that features are frozen for Danube. Whatever features you've implemented, whatever installers and scenarios you are integrated with, is what will be released and no more. There should be no more development activity. >From now to the release date, all effort should be dedicated to finishing test case implementation (MS6), fixing bugs, and completing documentation. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] Fwd: [release] Reminder - Asia / Pacific release meeting Feb 21 at 7 p.m. PST
FYI -- Forwarded message -- From: David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:11 PM Subject: [release] Reminder - Asia / Pacific release meeting Feb 21 at 7 p.m. PST To: kong.w...@zte.com.cn, Zhipeng Huang <zhipengh...@gmail.com>, Yujun Zhang <zhangyujun+...@gmail.com>, Ryota Mibu <r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com>, joehuang <joehu...@huawei.com>, "Chigang (Justin)" <chig...@huawei.com>, huzhj_zte <hu.zhiji...@zte.com.cn>, 胡捷 <hu@zte.com.cn>, huangzhipeng < huangzhip...@huawei.com>, "Gaoliang (kubi)" <jean.gaoli...@huawei.com>, 付乔 < fuq...@chinamobile.com>, "Yuyang (Gabriel)" <gabriel.yuy...@huawei.com>, Yujun Zhang <zhang.yuj...@zte.com.cn>, Jason HU <huzhiji...@gmail.com> Just a reminder... This meeting will focus on the status and reporting for MS6. We will also talk about planning for the E-release. Please let me know if you have any specific topics that you'd like to add to the agenda. Logistics, agenda, and meeting notes here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/ viewpage.action?pageId=8690599 Our first meeting was productive, so let's keep up the momentum with another good meeting this week. I look forward to chatting with all of you. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] E-release schedule
Thanks to everyone for your feedback in this thread. Also, thanks to Ash and Randy with whom I talked at OSLS last week. It's clear from the feedback that the community, including our end users, feel strongly about having additional releases, beyond the standard, 6-month major release cadence. I think that Frank's description of monthly micro-releases is compelling and I believe that the work that Fatih, Jack, and Uli are doing with CI evolution and cross-community CI may enable us to consider this type of release process in the future. In the mean time, I'm withdrawing my proposal to drop the 2.0 and 3.0 follow-on releases for the upcoming "E" - major release. I have uploaded a revised schedule <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/E-River> to the wiki. We will discuss the schedule again at the next TSC call. Feel free to continue to respond to this thread with your comments and questions. David On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Randy Levensalor < r.levensa...@cablelabs.com> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback and ideas of solving our challenges with running > OPNFV as a VNF development and evaluation platform. > > I was not trying to prescribe a specific solution, but wanted to call out > the challenges that we are encountering when running OPFNV in our NFV labs. > > The direction of Tim and Frank’s feedback could help address these > challenges. Enabling the installer teams to focus on maintenance post > release. > > Enabling scenario teams to rollout new scenarios in maintenance releases > that do NOT negatively impact the stability of the currently supported > scenarios could be a reasonable compromise. Or just following the strict > model as outlined by Ulrich would help with the stability. > > Please don’t break backwards compatibility of the configuration files > during maintenance releases. Changing configuration files with major > releases would be manageable. > > > Many Thanks, > > Randy Levensalor | r.levensa...@cablelabs.com > CableLabs® | o 303.661.3455 | c 970.214.1316 > > > On 2/22/17, 8:18 AM, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <fbroc...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > That makes sense. The whole point of micro-releases would be to > release scenarios once they are ready - and it falls into the > responsibility of a scenario owner to shepherd the process. Micro-releases > should *not* be a vehicle to push other teams to go out of their way. > > Frank > > -Original Message- > From: Tim Rozet [mailto:tro...@redhat.com] > Sent: Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2017 15:53 > To: Ulrich Kleber <ulrich.kle...@huawei.com> > Cc: Randy Levensalor <r.levensa...@cablelabs.com>; Frank Brockners > (fbrockne) <fbroc...@cisco.com>; David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] E-release schedule > > I think having maintenance releases makes sense. From an installer > perspective, if folks want to add a new scenario for a maintenance release > then they need to carry most of the weight of integrating it. It is hard > for a small team like Apex to juggle adding features for a previous release > while rushing to get the next version of OS to work for the following > release. Bug fixing and documentation updates I think we are fine with for > maintenance releases. > > Tim Rozet > Red Hat SDN Team > > - Original Message - > From: "Ulrich Kleber" <ulrich.kle...@huawei.com> > To: "Randy Levensalor" <r.levensa...@cablelabs.com>, "Frank Brockners > (fbrockne)" <fbroc...@cisco.com>, "David McBride" < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>, "TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV" < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>, opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 8:00:09 AM > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] E-release schedule > > > > Hi, > > what Randy explains would mean that we should move to a very strict > concept of maintenance releases. > > That would mean we carry through our milestones properly to get the > 1.0 release out. After that we should only do bug fixing. Not a single > feature. > > If we do that, 2.0 and 3.0 will not take big efforts, but each provide > better stability. It shouldn’t even be a problem to do 4.0 if there are > urgent fixes. > > But we should be strict then: Every feature that misses the 1.0, has > to wait for the next major release. > > Just my 2 cents. > > Cheers, > > Uli > > > > > > > Fro
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] Danube stable branch date and time
Team, I took an action at the last release meeting to specify a specific time for closing the stable branch on March 10. We will close the stable branch at 12 p.m. (noon PST) on March 10. Note that I have another action that is in process to update the stable branch instructions for Danube. I will email the team when those instructions are available. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] MS6 compliance assessment
Yingjun, In order to be part of the release, Opera needs to be running on OPNFV CI. At this point, I think that you will need to defer your project to the E release. David On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Yingjun Li <yingjun...@huawei.com> wrote: > > > a. > > b.David > > The following is MS6 update about OPERA. > > c. > > d.Enabling testing for your project in the Functest repo (or other > test framework repo if you are not using functest) > > e. > > f. OPERA VNF deployment and test entries has been integrated with > FuncTest framework. The integration scripts are still under development. > > g.https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/26769/ > > h.https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/26769/8/functest/ > opnfv_tests/vnf/ims/opera_ims.py > > Test case implementation in your project repo: OPERA test case > implementations is under developing and haven’t checked in yet. > > 2.Please indicate whether the scenarios with which your project is > integrated are visible on the Functest dashboard. If not, why? > > 3. OPERA is not running under FuncTest/Compass. It is running on > OPERA CI > > a. *https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/opera/ > <https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/opera/>* > > b. > > c. Please provide a link to the preliminary documentation for your > project. > > d.*https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/29335/1 > <https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/29335/1>* > > e. > > Thanks > > Yingjun > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:30 PM > *To:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] MS6 compliance > assessment > > > > Team, > > > > I'd like to request that the PTLs for projects participating in Danube > respond to the following questions, designed to assess compliance with MS6. > Feature Projects > > 4.Please provide a list of commits for the following: > > a. Enabling testing for your project in the Functest repo (or other > test framework repo if you are not using functest) > > b.Test case implementation in your project repo. > > 5.Please indicate whether the scenarios with which your project is > integrated are visible on the Functest dashboard. If not, why? > Test Framework Projects > > 1.Please provide a list of commits for your self-validation tests. > Preliminary Documentation Requirement > > 1.Please provide a link to the preliminary documentation for your > project. > > > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > > > David > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] MS6 compliance assessment
Team, Thanks for your responses, thus far. However, quite a few of you are forgetting to respond to the *preliminary documentation requirement* that also applies to MS6, in addition to the test case implementation requirement. Preliminary Documentation Requirement 1. Please provide a link to the preliminary documentation for your project. On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:30 PM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > I'd like to request that the PTLs for projects participating in Danube > respond to the following questions, designed to assess compliance with MS6. > Feature Projects > >1. Please provide a list of commits for the following: > 1. Enabling testing for your project in the Functest repo (or other > test framework repo if you are not using functest) > 2. Test case implementation in your project repo. >2. Please indicate whether the scenarios with which your project is >integrated are visible on the Functest dashboard. If not, why? > > Test Framework Projects > >1. Please provide a list of commits for your self-validation tests. > > Preliminary Documentation Requirement > >1. Please provide a link to the preliminary documentation for your >project. > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][danube] MS6 compliance assessment
Mark, Could you send me a git query, instead? For example, for QTIP: https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/q/project:qtip+AND+topic:tests David On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> wrote: > Responses for StorPerf: > > Test Framework Projects > >1. Please provide a list of commits for your self-validation tests. > > > As with other projects, the list of commits would be very large. The > self-validation occurs on git review, and the Jenkins job can be found > here: https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/storperf/job/storperf-verify-master/ > There are just over 100 self-validation tests which provide 69% code > coverage. > > There is now a Test Results DB dashboard for StorPerf: http://testresults. > opnfv.org/reporting/display/master/storperf/status-apex.html > > Preliminary Documentation Requirement > >1. Please provide a link to the preliminary documentation for your >project. > > > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/storperf/docs/index.html > > Regards, > Mark > > *Mark Beierl* > Advisory Solutions Architect > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > mark.bei...@dell.com > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] OPNFV Milestone 6 - test case implementation / preliminary documentation
Reminder... this Friday! On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:18 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Reminder... one week from Friday. > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:39 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Team, >> >> Milestone 6 is fast approaching, two weeks from today, on Feb 17. This >> milestone has two major requirements: >> >> *Test Case Implementation* >> As you recall, test cases were documented in the test case database as of >> Milestone 2 last fall. For milestone 6, those test cases must be >> implemented and running in OPNFV CI. However, they are not required to be >> passing at this point. >> >> If you have questions about test case implementation. Please contact the >> test framework leads, directly, or attend the Test Working Group meetings >> on Thursdays. >> >> *Preliminary Documentation* >> The documentation requirement is new for Danube. If you attended the >> release meeting on January 31, you heard Sofia walk us through the >> requirement. The basic idea is to get the directory structure and >> placeholder documents committed to the repo. Hopefully, this will reduce >> the confusion and delays that we had with documentation for the Colorado >> release. Of course, you are welcome to go beyond that minimum requirement, >> if you're ready to do so. >> >> Here's some additional direction from Sofia: >> >> >> All projects should have their document structure committed in respective >> repositories. >> >> Applicable templates and titles ready in accordance to directives. >> >> >> >> Updated documentation directives is now available on the wiki >> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DOC/Documentation+Guide> and you are >> welcome to comment if anything needs or can be clarified. >> >> >> If you have additional questions about the documentation requirement, >> please contact Sofia Wallin, or attend the bi-weekly documentation working >> group meeting. >> >> Thanks. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][jira] JIRA process status report
We need to be able to differentiate between issues that are intended for some indefinite future release and those where the reporter, or the triage team, has simply forgotten to fill in the field. On other projects, I've used a release version called "future release," or similar. I think that we should do that for OPNFV, as well. Let me think about that some more, then I'll provide guidance and a procedure in a week or two (i.e. after LinuxCon). Thanks. David On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:36 AM, Christopher Price <chrispric...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Gerald, > > > > In my opinion at least if there is no target release for an activity don’t > mark it with one. (leave it empty) > > This allows you to use tags for your own projects purposes and for the > release activity to use tags for release purposes. No need to govern > things in the release processes that do not need governance in that context. > > > > Also allows us to have parallel (and/or overlapping) tracked processes if > necessary. > > > > / Chris > > > > *From: *<opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of > "Kunzmann, Gerald" <kunzm...@docomolab-euro.com> > *Date: *Friday 19 August 2016 at 11:17 > *To: *David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>, "Beierl, Mark" < > mark.bei...@emc.com> > *Cc: *opnfv-project-leads <opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org>, > TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > *Subject: *Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][jira] > JIRA process status report > > > > Hi David, > > > > What about tasks that a project is not planning to fix in Colorado, nor D > release, but wants to keep the task as a reminder for a future release, > i.e. the fix version is not clear yet? In Doctor and Promise we had left > the “fixVersion” field empty for such cases. Which would be the recommended > “fixVersion” version for such cases? > > > > Best regards, > > Gerald > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Donnerstag, 18. August 2016 20:51 > *To:* Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> > *Cc:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists. > opnfv.org > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][jira] > JIRA process status report > > > > Yes, all tasks, including sub-tasks. Thanks. > > > > David > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> > wrote: > > Hey, David. > > > > Are you asking that all subtasks also be assigned to a version when you > are doing your check for Unassigned Issues found? I only track fix version > to the story level as subtasks are assigned to the story and it has a fix > version. > > > > Regards, > > Mark > > > > *Mark Beierl | Advisory Solutions Architect * > > Communication & Media Cloud – CTO Office > > EMC Federation > > +1 (613) 314-8106 > > @MarkBeierl > > > > On Aug 18, 2016, at 1:57 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > > > Team, > > > > As you know, I've been asking PTLs to update their JIRA projects to > improve accuracy and to enable use of JIRA as a project management tool. > Note that these updates will also improve the accuracy and relevance of > JIRA reports produced by Bitergia. > > > > Essentially, I'm asking the team to follow four basic principles: > >1. All JIRA issues must be assigned to a common version string, using >the "fix version" field. >2. Commit messages must include a reference to the issue ID. >3. JIRA issue status should be updated whenever the status changes. >4. All JIRA issues assigned to a particular release must either be >closed, or pushed out to a future release (i.e. update "fix version") by >the release date. > > In order to track progress for 1 and 3, I've put together a script that > pulls data from JIRA. The first report is attached. Please locate your > project in the report and make plans to resolve any issues that are > identified. > > > > Notes on the report: > >- "no versions" - indicates that the admin page contains no version >strings for selection in the "fix version" field. > > >- To fix this, add the common version strings to the "Versions" > section on the project admin page. > > >- "Version list NOT correct" - the project contains version strings, >but is m
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][jira] JIRA process status report
Team, Gerald K raised a good point: what do you do in the event that you have an issue that you want to document, but which won't be resolved until some indefinite release in the future? To deal with this case, I've added a version to all of the projects called "Future Release". So, if you don't want to assign the issue to Colorado 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, or D, then please assign it to this version. Please, only assign to this version if you are fairly certain that you won't resolve the issue until after the D release. Note that one implication of doing this is that you *must* periodically review the issues assigned to 'Future Release' and either assign them to a planned release, or close them. On projects I've worked on in the past, we often did this toward the end of a release, in preparation for the start of the next release. So, why not just leave "fix version" empty in this case? The answer is that we need to be able to differentiate between a positive decision to assign an issue to an indefinite future release, and simply forgetting to fill in the "fix version" field. Let me know if you have any questions. David On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:57 AM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > As you know, I've been asking PTLs to update their JIRA projects to > improve accuracy and to enable use of JIRA as a project management tool. > Note that these updates will also improve the accuracy and relevance of > JIRA reports produced by Bitergia. > > Essentially, I'm asking the team to follow four basic principles: > >1. All JIRA issues must be assigned to a common version string, using >the "fix version" field. >2. Commit messages must include a reference to the issue ID. >3. JIRA issue status should be updated whenever the status changes. >4. All JIRA issues assigned to a particular release must either be >closed, or pushed out to a future release (i.e. update "fix version") by >the release date. > > In order to track progress for 1 and 3, I've put together a script that > pulls data from JIRA. The first report is attached. Please locate your > project in the report and make plans to resolve any issues that are > identified. > > Notes on the report: > >- "no versions" - indicates that the admin page contains no version >strings for selection in the "fix version" field. > - To fix this, add the common version strings to the "Versions" > section on the project admin page. >- "Version list NOT correct" - the project contains version strings, >but is missing one or more of the *common* version strings. > - All projects must use the common set of version strings. >- "Unassigned issues found: [list]" - the project has issues where the >"fix version" field is empty. > - Remember, all issues must be assignee to a version, using the > "fix version" field. > - About 85% of the projects have unassigned issues. > - There are two solutions to this: (a) educate your project team to > set the field when they create the ticket; (b) when you conduct a bug > scrub, or triage, search your JIRA project for issues that are > unassigned > and update them. > > *Kudos! * Note that the Domino, Models, and IPv6 projects all have the > correct version list and no unassigned issues. An inspiration to us all :) > > Final note: this script is new, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are > errors. If you see something that doesn't make sense, please let me know. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][jira] JIRA process status report
Team, As you know, I've been asking PTLs to update their JIRA projects to improve accuracy and to enable use of JIRA as a project management tool. Note that these updates will also improve the accuracy and relevance of JIRA reports produced by Bitergia. Essentially, I'm asking the team to follow four basic principles: 1. All JIRA issues must be assigned to a common version string, using the "fix version" field. 2. Commit messages must include a reference to the issue ID. 3. JIRA issue status should be updated whenever the status changes. 4. All JIRA issues assigned to a particular release must either be closed, or pushed out to a future release (i.e. update "fix version") by the release date. In order to track progress for 1 and 3, I've put together a script that pulls data from JIRA. The first report is attached. Please locate your project in the report and make plans to resolve any issues that are identified. Notes on the report: - "no versions" - indicates that the admin page contains no version strings for selection in the "fix version" field. - To fix this, add the common version strings to the "Versions" section on the project admin page. - "Version list NOT correct" - the project contains version strings, but is missing one or more of the *common* version strings. - All projects must use the common set of version strings. - "Unassigned issues found: [list]" - the project has issues where the "fix version" field is empty. - Remember, all issues must be assignee to a version, using the "fix version" field. - About 85% of the projects have unassigned issues. - There are two solutions to this: (a) educate your project team to set the field when they create the ticket; (b) when you conduct a bug scrub, or triage, search your JIRA project for issues that are unassigned and update them. *Kudos! * Note that the Domino, Models, and IPv6 projects all have the correct version list and no unassigned issues. An inspiration to us all :) Final note: this script is new, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are errors. If you see something that doesn't make sense, please let me know. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride APEX Version list correct Unassigned issues found: APEX-237, APEX-228, APEX-227, APEX-23 ARMBAND Version list correct Unassigned issues found: ARMBAND-52, ARMBAND-49, ARMBAND-20 FUNCTEST Version list correct Unassigned issues found: FUNCTEST-396, FUNCTEST-372, FUNCTEST-343, FUNCTEST-336, FUNCTEST-335, FUNCTEST-334, FUNCTEST-332, FUNCTEST-283, FUNCTEST-237, FUNCTEST-232, FUNCTEST-211, FUNCTEST-210, FUNCTEST-209, FUNCTEST-203, FUNCTEST-200, FUNCTEST-192, FUNCTEST-187, FUNCTEST-185, FUNCTEST-177, FUNCTEST-176, FUNCTEST-175, FUNCTEST-173, FUNCTEST-172, FUNCTEST-169, FUNCTEST-168, FUNCTEST-167, FUNCTEST-166, FUNCTEST-163, FUNCTEST-162, FUNCTEST-161, FUNCTEST-160, FUNCTEST-157, FUNCTEST-88, FUNCTEST-87, FUNCTEST-67, FUNCTEST-15 BOTTLENECK Version list correct Unassigned issues found: BOTTLENECK-90, BOTTLENECK-89, BOTTLENECK-88, BOTTLENECK-87, BOTTLENECK-82, BOTTLENECK-81, BOTTLENECK-80, BOTTLENECK-79, BOTTLENECK-77, BOTTLENECK-75, BOTTLENECK-74, BOTTLENECK-70, BOTTLENECK-66, BOTTLENECK-65, BOTTLENECK-61, BOTTLENECK-59, BOTTLENECK-43, BOTTLENECK-34, BOTTLENECK-22, BOTTLENECK-20, BOTTLENECK-18, BOTTLENECK-14, BOTTLENECK-13, BOTTLENECK-12, BOTTLENECK-11, BOTTLENECK-9 COMPASS Version list correct Unassigned issues found: COMPASS-457, COMPASS-445, COMPASS-443, COMPASS-435, COMPASS-434, COMPASS-388, COMPASS-350, COMPASS-244, COMPASS-48, COMPASS-37, COMPASS-27, COMPASS-26, COMPASS-25, COMPASS-2 OCTO Version list correct Unassigned issues found: OCTO-141 CPERF Version list correct Unassigned issues found: CPERF-4, CPERF-3, CPERF-2, CPERF-1 DAISY no versions PREDICTION Version list correct Unassigned issues found: PREDICTION-33 DPACC Version list correct Unassigned issues found: DPACC-15, DPACC-14, DPACC-13, DPACC-12, DPACC-11, DPACC-10, DPACC-9, DPACC-8, DPACC-6, DPACC-5, DPACC-4, DPACC-3, DPACC-2 PARSER Version list correct Unassigned issues found: PARSER-59 ENFV no versions ESCALATOR no versions FDS Version list correct Unassigned issues found: FDS-14, FDS-13, FDS-12, FDS-11, FDS-10, FDS-9, FDS-8, FDS-7, FDS-6, FDS-5, FDS-4, FDS-3, FDS-2, FDS-1 DOCTOR Version list correct Unassigned issues found: DOCTOR-68, DOCTOR-54, DOCTOR-52, DOCTOR-28, DOCTOR-26, DOCTOR-16 FUEL Version list correct Unassigned issues found: FUEL-164, FUEL-160, FUEL-117, FUEL-89, FUEL-88 GENESIS Version list correct Unassigned issues found: GENESIS-90, GENESIS-89, GENESIS-88, GENESIS-87, GENESIS-86, GENESIS-85, GENESIS-84, GENESIS-82, GENESIS-81, GENESIS-80, GENESIS-77, GENESIS-75, GENES
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] Danube stable branch date and time
Yes, that's correct. Of course, there is significant overhead in cherry-picking changes, so it's in your interest to complete as many bug fixes as possible before you branch. David On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi David, > > > > I suppose you mean closing the window for cutting the stable branch. The > branch itself will remain open for bug fixes, right? > > > > Best regards > > Georg > > > > > > *From:* opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Saturday, February 25, 2017 5:26 AM > *To:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; Tapio Tallgren < > tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>; Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> > *Subject:* [opnfv-project-leads] [release] Danube stable branch date and > time > > > > Team, > > > > I took an action at the last release meeting to specify a specific time > for closing the stable branch on March 10. We will close the stable branch > at 12 p.m. (noon PST) on March 10. > > > > Note that I have another action that is in process to update the stable > branch instructions for Danube. I will email the team when those > instructions are available. > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. > > > > David > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [TestPerf] Today's meeting agenda
Hi Mark, I have an action from the TSC to gather input on the following with the Test and CI teams: should "no-ha" scenarios be allowed to pass the deploy step by using a virtual environment, instead of bare metal? If you and the team agree, and if there's time, I'd like to add that to the agenda. Thanks. David On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> wrote: > Hello all, and sorry for the late notice on an agenda for today’s > meeting. I would like to propose the following > >- Action point follow-up (5') >- Colorado test status (15') - teams present please give an update >- Colorado test reporting overview - can someone give a highlight of >what jobs and dashboards are available? >- AoB (5') > > > Meeting logistics: > >- Time: Thursday 14:00 - 15:00 UTC / 07:00 - 08:00 PDT (in ~30 minutes) >- IRC: #opnfv-testperf >- GTM: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/305553637 > > > Regards, > Mark > > *Mark Beierl | **Advisory Solutions Architect* > Communication & Media Cloud – CTO Office > EMC Federation > +1 (613) 314-8106 > @MarkBeierl > > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][jira] OPNFV JIRA status
Team, Thanks for your feedback on the script results. I've updated the script to exclude additional projects that aren't participating in the release, per your suggestions. I've also updated the terminology to use "planned" instead of "assigned", since that was causing some confusion. Results: 1. Most of the projects (69%) still have unplanned issues. Please make an effort to get these issues assigned to either the current release, or a future release. 2. We still have nearly 300 unresolved issues assigned to Colorado 1.0. This may be undercounting the actual value, since we still have a large number of unplanned issues. It's time to either get these closed, or to move them to a future release (i.e. update "fix version" field). Let me know if you have any questions David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride APEX Version list correct 11 unplanned issues found: APEX-255, APEX-254, APEX-253, APEX-251, APEX-248, APEX-247, APEX-246, APEX-241, APEX-228, APEX-227, APEX-23 20 / 132 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved ARMBAND Version list correct 2 unplanned issues found: ARMBAND-69, ARMBAND-20 11 / 26 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUNCTEST Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: FUNCTEST-450 15 / 212 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved BGS Version list correct 27 unplanned issues found: BGS-75, BGS-64, BGS-63, BGS-57, BGS-52, BGS-46, BGS-40, BGS-37, BGS-35, BGS-34, BGS-29, BGS-28, BGS-27, BGS-26, BGS-24, BGS-22, BGS-21, BGS-19, BGS-12, BGS-11, BGS-10, BGS-9, BGS-8, BGS-7, BGS-5, BGS-4, BGS-3 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved BOTTLENECK Version list correct 23 unplanned issues found: BOTTLENECK-90, BOTTLENECK-89, BOTTLENECK-88, BOTTLENECK-87, BOTTLENECK-82, BOTTLENECK-81, BOTTLENECK-80, BOTTLENECK-79, BOTTLENECK-77, BOTTLENECK-75, BOTTLENECK-74, BOTTLENECK-66, BOTTLENECK-65, BOTTLENECK-61, BOTTLENECK-59, BOTTLENECK-43, BOTTLENECK-34, BOTTLENECK-22, BOTTLENECK-14, BOTTLENECK-13, BOTTLENECK-12, BOTTLENECK-11, BOTTLENECK-9 0 / 33 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COMPASS Version list correct 14 unplanned issues found: COMPASS-477, COMPASS-463, COMPASS-445, COMPASS-435, COMPASS-434, COMPASS-388, COMPASS-350, COMPASS-244, COMPASS-48, COMPASS-37, COMPASS-27, COMPASS-26, COMPASS-25, COMPASS-2 58 / 149 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OCTO Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: OCTO-141 0 / 7 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved CPERF Version list correct 4 unplanned issues found: CPERF-4, CPERF-3, CPERF-2, CPERF-1 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COPPER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PREDICTION Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: PREDICTION-33 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DPACC Version list correct 13 unplanned issues found: DPACC-15, DPACC-14, DPACC-13, DPACC-12, DPACC-11, DPACC-10, DPACC-9, DPACC-8, DPACC-6, DPACC-5, DPACC-4, DPACC-3, DPACC-2 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PARSER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 17 / 82 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FDS Version list correct 14 unplanned issues found: FDS-14, FDS-13, FDS-12, FDS-11, FDS-10, FDS-9, FDS-8, FDS-7, FDS-6, FDS-5, FDS-4, FDS-3, FDS-2, FDS-1 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DOCTOR Version list correct 17 unplanned issues found: DOCTOR-70, DOCTOR-68, DOCTOR-60, DOCTOR-59, DOCTOR-58, DOCTOR-54, DOCTOR-52, DOCTOR-49, DOCTOR-48, DOCTOR-41, DOCTOR-40, DOCTOR-39, DOCTOR-38, DOCTOR-20, DOCTOR-19, DOCTOR-18, DOCTOR-16 5 / 13 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUEL Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: FUEL-88 21 / 70 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved GENESIS Version list correct 35 unplanned issues found: GENESIS-90, GENESIS-89, GENESIS-88, GENESIS-87, GENESIS-86, GENESIS-85, GENESIS-84, GENESIS-82, GENESIS-81, GENESIS-80, GENESIS-77, GENESIS-75, GENESIS-69, GENESIS-63, GENESIS-57, GENESIS-56, GENESIS-55, GENESIS-54, GENESIS-53, GENESIS-50, GENESIS-49, GENESIS-42, GENESIS-41, GENESIS-40, GENESIS-38, GENESIS-37, GENESIS-36, GENESIS-35, GENESIS-32, GENESIS-30, GENESIS-25, GENESIS-23, GENESIS-3, GENESIS-2, GENESIS-1 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved HA Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 4 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved YARDSTICK Version list correct 12 unplanned issues found: YARDSTICK-325, YARDSTICK-324, YARDSTICK-323, YARDSTICK-322, YARDSTICK-319, YARDSTICK-317, YARDSTICK-315, YARDSTICK-311, YARDSTICK-218, YARDSTICK-217, YARDSTICK-216, YARDSTICK-64 20 / 84 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] OPNFV D-release naming
I'm thinking the "David River" in Panama <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_River> would be ideal. On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:25 PM, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Any other suggestions? A reminder that "nominations" for the D-release > naming closes at 5pm Pacific Time on Friday (September 2nd). > > Thanks, > > Ray > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:34 AM, <morgan.richo...@orange.com> wrote: > >> Don is a good and tricky idea! >> Danube is good as well even if it will be our 4th release and we have 5 >> continents (same issue with Don) >> >> congratulations to Dave for Dordogne! There are lot of French rivers >> starting with D but Dordogne is the best place for food.. :) >> >> I am a bit disapointed by the Australian rivers, they seem all >> pronounceable this time >> >> Let's vote... >> >> /Morgan >> >> >> >> Le 29/08/2016 à 09:26, Ash a écrit : >> >> I'd like to propose "Don", a Russian river and in tribute to the father >> of NFV, Mr. Don Clarke. >> >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org >> > wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> As discussed on the last TSC call, I'd like to get the process started >>> for the D-release naming. >>> >>> A quick reminder that we have a river theme for OPNFV releases and our >>> first 3 release names are Arno (Europe), Brahmaputra (Asia), and >>> Colorado (Americas). I'd like to continue the tradition of going to >>> different continents/geographies, so we could venture into Africa or return >>> to Europe... >>> >>> Can you send me your top 2-3 nominations (at most) in the following >>> format by 5pm Pacific Time on September 2nd? After I collect all the >>> nominations, I'll send out a SurveyMonkey poll so the community can pick >>> the winner >>> >>> Format: River name (locations) >>> For example, >>> >>>- Danube (Austria, Germany, Hungary, etc.) >>>- Draa (Algeria, Morocco) >>>- etc. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ray >>> >>> ___ >>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org >>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> ___ >> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing >> listopnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.orghttps://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> >> >> >> -- >> Morgan Richomme >> Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA >> >> Network architect for innovative services >> Future of the Network community member >> Open source Orange community manager >> >> >> tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106 >> mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326morgan.richo...@orange.com >> >> _ >> >> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations >> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc >> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu >> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler >> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages >> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, >> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou >> falsifie. Merci. >> >> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged >> information that may be protected by law; >> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. >> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and >> delete this message and its attachments. >> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been >> modified, changed or falsified. >> Thank you. >> >> > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference Projects Published in C release
Hi Gerald, I'm certainly aware that many project do most, or even all, of their work upstream. When I say "deliver code", that includes making changes in upstream projects. Also, to be clear, I'm NOT saying that requirements projects should not be part of OPNFV, I'm just saying that I do not see the benefit of a project joining a release if their only activity is writing a requirements document. Join the OPNFV project, write a requirements document, then join a release. Perhaps I'm missing something, though. What benefit do you see in the release process for projects that are only writing requirements? Why could that not be done as part of the OPNFV project, but outside of the release process? David On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Kunzmann, Gerald < kunzm...@docomolab-euro.com> wrote: > Hi David, all, > > > > My 2 cent on your question: > > > > The question is: does it make sense for requirements projects to > participate in releases until they're ready to deliver code? > > > > Requirement projects are an essential part of OPNFV and some may even do > all development in upstream, i.e. there might even be no code within OPNFV > except test cases. Thus, I support having the requirement documents as part > of the release documentation. > > > > Best regards, > > Gerald > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Georg Kunz > *Sent:* Mittwoch, 31. August 2016 09:42 > *To:* Daniel Smith <daniel.sm...@ericsson.com>; David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > > *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference > Projects Published in C release > > > > Hi Daniel, hi all, > > > > Thank you Daniel for stating the advantages for the requirements projects > and for OPNFV. From my point of view it is important for projects which are > currently in the “requirements phase” to be represented in an OPNFV release: > > > > - We are in the process of reaching out to the OpenStack > community based on our document. Making the requirements document an > official part of an OPNFV release helps us in doing that by having an > “official backing” of OPNFV (we are an OPNFV project after all) > > - It shows to the outside world that projects are active in all > phases (requirements phase), supporting the overall perception of OPNFV > > - It gives the project members the feeling of contributing to > OPNFV > > > > I had some discussions with Chris and Sofia on this during the OPNFV > summit. Back then the proposal was to include our requirements document in > the “document library” under a section such as “requirements projects”. > This could be a simple link – just as we have it right now on our project > wiki. > > > > As David pointed out, there is some overhead involved for the project, but > I believe the benefits outweigh the overhead. > > > > Looking forward to discussing with you in today’s docs meeting. > > > > Best regards > > Georg > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Smith > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 30, 2016 11:44 PM > *To:* David McBride > *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference > Projects Published in C release > > > > Hey All. > > > > I spoke with Sofia as well about this and presented our NetReady > situation. We have a document that covers what we wanted to cover for Phase > 1 (targeting C release) of the NetReady Requirements Project. We now want > to stop internally editing it and release it for comment – and the thinking > is that, since we have built the document in gerrit and based on DOCS > formatting guidelines, was the vehicle to provide the following in terms of > the work that the team did: > > > > -Allow for the completion and publishing of the Project Goals > Phase 1 targets (in line with agreed principles when the project was > approved/started) – Phase2,3,4 as outlined are targeted for subsequent > releases as documented > > -Allow for the distribution of the finished product to external > (non commiter/contributer groups) - is it realistic to think that someone > from Openstack (whom the requirements are destined for) will look at the > RST line format in our gerrit repository to find our documentation? (rather > than in the released docs page/artifact)? Or perhaps a different way of > looking at it would be to ask, how do we move the fin
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule
I think that we've reduced the branch-related overhead in 'Danube' by closing the stable branch window just 10 days before the release, as opposed to about a month with Colorado. My concern about individual projects deciding whether to branch is that I think that it creates some confusion about the location of the candidate release. I think it's simpler and more predictable if we have a common process for all projects participating in the release. David On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Christopher Price <chrispric...@gmail.com> wrote: > We are making some progress. > > While I do agree with this: “I think projects should have autonomy over > when branches are created.”. > I also think it is up to the release project to set the projects with the > latest date to do it if they want to participate in any given release. I > think that’s essentially what we are trying to tune and optimize for > everyone in this dialog. > > / Chris > > On 13/09/16 16:10, "Dave Neary" <opnfv-tech-discuss-bounces@ > lists.opnfv.org on behalf of dne...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 09/13/2016 06:42 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) wrote: > > one thing that we’ve not closed on in the discussion last Tuesday is > the > > stable-branching milestone. Per what Morgan and I elaborated on: > > Branching occurs a lot of unnecessary overhead for projects which > have a > > single development stream only. Hence I’d like to propose that > > > > · the branching milestones **prior** to the release should > > **only** be applied to projects which do parallel development. > > > > · All other projects would branch on the release date – so > that we > > have a proper maintenance branch. > > > > Thoughts? > > I'm in favour of anything that removes process overhead from projects - > I think projects should have autonomy over when branches are created. > > Thanks, > Dave. > > -- > Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy > Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com > Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 > _______ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] D-release schedule
Reminder... if you haven't yet reviewed the schedule, please do so before the TSC and release meetings on Tuesday, where it will likely be discussed. David On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:45 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > I've posted an update to the schedule > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/6827418/OPNFV%20Release%20%2522D%2522%20r2.pdf?version=1=1473367413338=v2>. > Please review and provide feedback. > > Note: during the release meeting on Tuesday, we discussed removing the > JIRA milestone, since it was not considered release gating. Since then, > I've changed my mind. For the D-release, I expect that we will have > implemented our JIRA processes sufficiently that we will be able to rely on > JIRA to understand project status. Therefore, it is appropriate to believe > that if we still have unresolved JIRA issues assigned to the release, then > the release is not complete. We will be discussing exactly how this will > be accomplished in the coming weeks. > > David > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][jira] OPNFV JIRA status
Team, See attachment for the latest OPNFV JIRA report. We still have 235 unresolved issues assigned to Colorado 1.0. Given that we are less than two weeks from the Colorado 1.0 release, these should be reassigned to future releases, unless you are confident that they will be resolved and closed this week. In addition, we still have 144 unplanned issues (i.e. issues not assigned to a release in the "fix version" field. Please continue to work to get these issue assigned to releases as soon as possible. Unplanned issues create ambiguity in understanding release status and for release planning. Thanks and let me know if you have questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride APEX Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: APEX-23 24 / 143 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved ARMBAND Version list correct 2 unplanned issues found: ARMBAND-69, ARMBAND-20 11 / 33 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUNCTEST Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: FUNCTEST-467 16 / 221 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved BOTTLENECK Version list correct 24 unplanned issues found: BOTTLENECK-92, BOTTLENECK-90, BOTTLENECK-89, BOTTLENECK-88, BOTTLENECK-87, BOTTLENECK-82, BOTTLENECK-81, BOTTLENECK-80, BOTTLENECK-79, BOTTLENECK-77, BOTTLENECK-75, BOTTLENECK-74, BOTTLENECK-66, BOTTLENECK-65, BOTTLENECK-61, BOTTLENECK-59, BOTTLENECK-43, BOTTLENECK-34, BOTTLENECK-22, BOTTLENECK-14, BOTTLENECK-13, BOTTLENECK-12, BOTTLENECK-11, BOTTLENECK-9 1 / 34 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COMPASS Version list correct 16 unplanned issues found: COMPASS-484, COMPASS-481, COMPASS-477, COMPASS-463, COMPASS-445, COMPASS-435, COMPASS-434, COMPASS-388, COMPASS-350, COMPASS-244, COMPASS-48, COMPASS-37, COMPASS-27, COMPASS-26, COMPASS-25, COMPASS-2 59 / 150 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OCTO Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: OCTO-141 0 / 7 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved CPERF Version list correct 4 unplanned issues found: CPERF-4, CPERF-3, CPERF-2, CPERF-1 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COPPER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PREDICTION Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DPACC Version list correct 13 unplanned issues found: DPACC-15, DPACC-14, DPACC-13, DPACC-12, DPACC-11, DPACC-10, DPACC-9, DPACC-8, DPACC-6, DPACC-5, DPACC-4, DPACC-3, DPACC-2 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PARSER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 16 / 85 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FDS Version list correct 6 unplanned issues found: FDS-10, FDS-9, FDS-7, FDS-5, FDS-4, FDS-1 7 / 33 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DOCTOR Version list correct 2 unplanned issues found: DOCTOR-70, DOCTOR-68 0 / 10 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUEL Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: FUEL-88 15 / 69 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved HA Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 4 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved YARDSTICK Version list correct 10 unplanned issues found: YARDSTICK-345, YARDSTICK-322, YARDSTICK-319, YARDSTICK-317, YARDSTICK-315, YARDSTICK-311, YARDSTICK-218, YARDSTICK-217, YARDSTICK-216, YARDSTICK-64 12 / 97 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved IPVSIX Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved JOID Version list correct 4 unplanned issues found: JOID-96, JOID-70, JOID-5, JOID-4 8 / 21 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MOVIE Version list correct 9 unplanned issues found: MOVIE-17, MOVIE-16, MOVIE-15, MOVIE-14, MOVIE-13, MOVIE-12, MOVIE-11, MOVIE-10, MOVIE-9 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MODELS Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MULTISITE Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 2 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved NETREADY Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved KVMFORNFV Version list correct 6 unplanned issues found: KVMFORNFV-52, KVMFORNFV-50, KVMFORNFV-48, KVMFORNFV-47, KVMFORNFV-44, KVMFORNFV-24 3 / 11 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved ONOSFW Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 19 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OVSNFV Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: OVSNFV-39 5 / 13 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OVNO Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: OVNO-1 6 / 14 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Notice of intent to participate in OPNFV Danube release (Domino Project)
Ulas, Chris Price is requesting that PTLs wait until the TSC has voted to begin the request to participate phase. We will be discussing tomorrow. Thanks. David On Monday, September 26, 2016, Ulas Kozat <ulas.ko...@huawei.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > > > In accordance with the procedure outlined here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/ > display/DEV/Project+Inclusion+in+OPNFV+Release > > > > I am notifying the OPNFV TSC of the intention of the Domino project to > participate in the OPNFV Danube release. > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Ulas Kozat > > Domino PTL > > > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] Reminder - Colorado 2.0 Daily release meeting starts Monday
Just a reminder that we will start the Colorado 2.0 daily release meeting (IRC only) on Monday, Oct 10 at 8 a.m. PST. The meeting will occur M, Th, Fri until the release. We will be using IRC channel opnfv-release. We will be focusing on Colorado 2.0, so if you have questions about Danube, or other release topics, please reserve them for the regular release meeting on Tuesdays. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] OPNFV Release Meeting
There were still some issues with the release meeting invitation and Go-To-Meeting, yesterday. These issues should be resolved now. Here's what I've done: 1. Cancelled the old meeting. Some people on the call yesterday reported that they still had the old meeting on their calendar. I'm not sure why this is, because I did cancel it last week. However, if you still have a recurring weekly meeting titled "OPNFV Colorado Release meeting", please manually delete it. 2. Started a new meeting. The new recurring weekly meeting is titled "OPNFV release meeting". I sent the invitation to the TSC and tech-discuss mailing lists last week. If you missed it, you can find it in the archives here <https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-September/012859.html> . 3. Updated the meetings page. Unfortunately, when I started the new meeting, I forgot to update the meetings page wiki with the new GTM info. That has now been corrected. I also updated the same information on the Release Meeting page. I don't believe that the GTM is posted anywhere else, but if you are aware of another location, please let me know. Once again, my apologies for the confusion with the release meeting. If you missed last week's, or this week's meetings, please see the agenda and minutes on the Release Meeting page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Release>. Please let me know if you continue to have trouble, or if you have any questions. David On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:57 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > There were a couple of hiccups with the release meeting this morning: > >1. GTM expired. >2. Agenda showed the meeting scheduled for Sept 29, instead of Sept 27 > > I take full credit for these issues, so my apologies if you were unable to > join the meeting. > > After some scrambling, we did, in fact, have a meeting. If you'd like to > catch up, please see the minutes in the usual place > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Release#Release-September27,2016> > . > > In order to resolve the GTM issue, I cancelled the old release meeting and > sent an invitation to a new meeting, same day-of-the-week and time. * Please > be sure to update your meeting invitation so that you have the correct GTM > link.* > > Once again, sorry for the disruption. I look forward to talking to you on > the release call again next week. > > As a reminder, I am at the ODL summit this week. If you are also at the > ODL summit and would like to talk with me, swing by the OPNFV booth. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] Colorado 2.0 / 3.0 schedule and possible interference with upcoming events
Greetings, At last week's TSC call, a concern was raised about interference between the Colorado 3.0 release date (December 5) and OPNFV Plugfest (Dec 5 - 9). Similarly, there is potential interference between Colorado 2.0 (October 27) and the OpenStack summit (Oct 25 - 28). The consensus, when this was discussed during the release meeting last week, was that the level of activity for Colorado 2.0 and 3.0 was low enough that these releases could be completed during the same time period as the events, so there was no need to change the schedule. However, I took an action to start a discussion on the mailing list to see whether there are strong opinions that we should change the schedule. So, please respond and let us know your opinion. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] Labelling your Colorado repo for the release.
Note that Aric just added some troubleshooting instructions at the bottom of the page that Chris just linked. Please follow those instructions if you are having difficulty. David On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Christopher Price < christopher.pr...@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi Project leads, > > > > If you have not already done it, now is the right time to make sure you > have the Colorado 1.0 label correctly applied to your repo. > > Please follow the instructions here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/ > display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Colorado+Release > > > > / Chris > > > > ___ > opnfv-project-leads mailing list > opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-project-leads > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule
Jonas, There may not be sufficient resources available prior to the opening of the window. So, this is a signal to the infra/CI team to be prepared to support CI on both master and stable branch. However, perhaps we could consider expanding the window from 1 week to, say 2 weeks. David On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Jonas Bjurel <jonas.bju...@ericsson.com> wrote: > I don’t see why we need a OPNFV policy on when earliest a stable branch > could happen – please explain! > > BR/Jonas > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 13, 2016 8:58 PM > *To:* Christopher Price <chrispric...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] > D-release schedule > > > > I think that we've reduced the branch-related overhead in 'Danube' by > closing the stable branch window just 10 days before the release, as > opposed to about a month with Colorado. My concern about individual > projects deciding whether to branch is that I think that it creates some > confusion about the location of the candidate release. I think it's > simpler and more predictable if we have a common process for all projects > participating in the release. > > > > David > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Christopher Price <chrispric...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > We are making some progress. > > While I do agree with this: “I think projects should have autonomy over > when branches are created.”. > I also think it is up to the release project to set the projects with the > latest date to do it if they want to participate in any given release. I > think that’s essentially what we are trying to tune and optimize for > everyone in this dialog. > > / Chris > > > On 13/09/16 16:10, "Dave Neary" <opnfv-tech-discuss-bounces@ > lists.opnfv.org on behalf of dne...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 09/13/2016 06:42 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) wrote: > > one thing that we’ve not closed on in the discussion last Tuesday is > the > > stable-branching milestone. Per what Morgan and I elaborated on: > > Branching occurs a lot of unnecessary overhead for projects which > have a > > single development stream only. Hence I’d like to propose that > > > > · the branching milestones **prior** to the release should > > **only** be applied to projects which do parallel development. > > > > · All other projects would branch on the release date – so > that we > > have a proper maintenance branch. > > > > Thoughts? > > I'm in favour of anything that removes process overhead from projects - > I think projects should have autonomy over when branches are created. > > Thanks, > Dave. > > -- > Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy > Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com > Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > > > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] OPNFV JIRA report
Team, See attached for this week's report. Per Frank's suggestion, I've eliminated "Epics" from the count of unplanned issues. The standout figure is that we still have 168 unresolved issues assigned to Colorado 1.0! Given that we have less than a week until the release, this is concerning. *PTLs - please move these issues to future releases by updating the "fix version" field.* One final note: I updated all of the projects and replaced "D" version with "Danube 1.0". I also added Danube 2.0 and 3.0. So, you are free to assign issues to those releases as you see fit. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride APEX Version list correct 5 unplanned issues found: APEX-270, APEX-268, APEX-267, APEX-266, APEX-265 23 / 143 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved ARMBAND Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 35 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUNCTEST Version list correct No unplanned issues found 14 / 223 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved BOTTLENECK Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 43 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COMPASS Version list correct 5 unplanned issues found: COMPASS-484, COMPASS-463, COMPASS-445, COMPASS-435, COMPASS-434 40 / 150 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OCTO Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 7 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved CPERF Version list correct 4 unplanned issues found: CPERF-4, CPERF-3, CPERF-2, CPERF-1 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved COPPER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 2 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PREDICTION Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DPACC Version list correct 9 unplanned issues found: DPACC-12, DPACC-11, DPACC-10, DPACC-9, DPACC-8, DPACC-6, DPACC-5, DPACC-4, DPACC-3 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PARSER Version list correct No unplanned issues found 1 / 77 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FDS Version list correct 8 unplanned issues found: FDS-82, FDS-81, FDS-80, FDS-79, FDS-75, FDS-61, FDS-10, FDS-9 6 / 37 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DOCTOR Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: DOCTOR-70 1 / 11 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved FUEL Version list correct No unplanned issues found 14 / 69 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved HA Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 4 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved YARDSTICK Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: YARDSTICK-325 4 / 104 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved IPVSIX Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 6 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved JOID Version list correct 1 unplanned issues found: JOID-96 8 / 21 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MOVIE Version list correct 9 unplanned issues found: MOVIE-17, MOVIE-16, MOVIE-15, MOVIE-14, MOVIE-13, MOVIE-12, MOVIE-11, MOVIE-10, MOVIE-9 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MODELS Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved MULTISITE Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 2 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved NETREADY Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 10 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved KVMFORNFV Version list correct 6 unplanned issues found: KVMFORNFV-52, KVMFORNFV-50, KVMFORNFV-48, KVMFORNFV-47, KVMFORNFV-44, KVMFORNFV-24 3 / 11 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved ONOSFW Version list correct No unplanned issues found 1 / 20 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OVSNFV Version list correct No unplanned issues found 6 / 14 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OVNO Version list correct No unplanned issues found 6 / 14 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved VFNGRAPH Version list correct 7 unplanned issues found: VFNGRAPH-9, VFNGRAPH-8, VFNGRAPH-7, VFNGRAPH-6, VFNGRAPH-4, VFNGRAPH-3, VFNGRAPH-2 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved OPERA Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved DOCS Version list correct 3 unplanned issues found: DOCS-160, DOCS-159, DOCS-157 16 / 79 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved POLICYTEST Version list correct 4 unplanned issues found: POLICYTEST-5, POLICYTEST-4, POLICYTEST-3, POLICYTEST-2 0 / 0 issues assigned to Colorado 1.0 that are unresolved PROMISE Version list correct No unplanned issues found 0 / 3 issues assigned to Colorado
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference Projects Published in C release
Thanks, Bryan. When I said "quality metrics", I was just using Bin's language. I'm still skeptical about the need for documentation-only projects to participate in a release. To be clear, it isn't a matter of whether I think these projects are important. I also think that there are other ways for projects to publish their requirements document without tying it to a release. However, it's obvious that many in the community think that this is an important thing to do. Therefore, if we're going to continue to associate documentation-only projects with a release, then we need to come up with some milestones and effective gates that provide some transparency beyond those involved in the project, itself. David On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:46 PM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L <bs3...@att.com> wrote: > David, > > > > To a point I put into my comments, there is no such thing as a > “requirements project” in OPNFV anymore. There are projects, and they have > artifacts. If the artifacts are simply documents, there are quality gates > that govern them (the gerrit commit review process), and project schedule > gates as well. > > > > I’m not sure what you mean as “quality metrics” for code contributed in a > release, other than gerrit reviews, tests, and project milestones. So I > would suggest not to push the analogy too far with documents, as the basis > for holding code up as an example is questionable other than the very same > things that apply for documents: reviews, tests (to the extent that we test > documents as suggested on the opnfvdocs project wiki) and milestones. > > > > Thanks, > > Bryan Sullivan | AT > > > > *From:* David McBride [mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 06, 2016 1:00 PM > *To:* HU, BIN > *Cc:* SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; Georg Kunz; Adi Molkho; Sofia Wallin; Kunzmann, > Gerald; Daniel Smith; Christopher Price; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists. > opnfv.org > > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference > Projects Published in C release > > > > Bin, > > > > You hit on a key point: "meets milestones and other quality metrics". > One reason that I question whether requirements projects should join a > release is that the requirements projects associated with Colorado > responded with "N/A" for most or all of their milestone reporting. That's > understandable, since the milestones are oriented toward projects that are > creating or modifying code. I'm not aware of any quality metrics that they > have been subjected to. > > > > So, that raises the question, should requirements projects be tracked in a > release? If so, what milestones or other metrics should be used to track > them? > > > > David > > > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 12:07 PM, HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com> wrote: > > +1 for Bryan’s point. > > > > If a project requests its docs to be included in release documentation, > and it meets milestones and other quality metrics and won’t pose any > adversary effects on release schedule, it should be included. > > > > Many documentation provides “knowledge”, as Heather indicated in a > separate thread, and is very valuable to industry. > > > > Thanks > > Bin > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *SULLIVAN, > BRYAN L > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 06, 2016 9:40 AM > *To:* Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; Adi Molkho < > adi.mol...@huawei.com>; Sofia Wallin <sofia.wal...@ericsson.com>; > Kunzmann, Gerald <kunzm...@docomolab-euro.com>; Daniel Smith < > daniel.sm...@ericsson.com>; David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>; > Christopher Price <christopher.pr...@ericsson.com> > *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] How are Documentation/Reference > Projects Published in C release > > > > Security Advisory:* This Message Originated Outside of AT *** > Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. > > My take is that we have projects, and those projects create documents that > are optionally (on request of the project) included in the release > documentation. We need go no further than that. Labelling projects > (something I thought we had moved away from) or types of documents/focuses > (e.g. requirements) and applying different policies as to what/how they are > included in the release documentation, is unnecessary and ultimately > confusing to the community. > > > > As an example, my Copper project documentation > <http://artifacts.opnfv.org/copper/docs/design/index.html>
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [genesis] Genesis in Colorado
Thanks for the update, Frank. David On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) < fbroc...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi David, team, > > > > FYI: Given that Genesis did not document any additional requirements for > deployment tools beyond what had already been defined for Brahmaputra and > the fact that we still haven’t arrived at defining and adopting common > configuration files across all installers, the Genesis project decided to > not participate in the upcoming Colorado release. I’ve updated the Colorado > project release page accordingly. > > > > Regards, > > Frank > > > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][hackfest] Release Milestone Review presentation
Thanks to those of you that attended my presentation at the OPNFV Q3 Hackfest. The questions and feedback I received are welcome and very helpful. I've posted the presentation on the wiki <https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/6824997/hackfest_ms_review.pdf?version=1=1472064505788=v2>. Let me know if you have additional questions or comments. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] OPNFV Release Meeting
There were a couple of hiccups with the release meeting this morning: 1. GTM expired. 2. Agenda showed the meeting scheduled for Sept 29, instead of Sept 27 I take full credit for these issues, so my apologies if you were unable to join the meeting. After some scrambling, we did, in fact, have a meeting. If you'd like to catch up, please see the minutes in the usual place <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Release#Release-September27,2016>. In order to resolve the GTM issue, I cancelled the old release meeting and sent an invitation to a new meeting, same day-of-the-week and time. * Please be sure to update your meeting invitation so that you have the correct GTM link.* Once again, sorry for the disruption. I look forward to talking to you on the release call again next week. As a reminder, I am at the ODL summit this week. If you are also at the ODL summit and would like to talk with me, swing by the OPNFV booth. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule
Hi Maryam, MS3 simply requires that installers are able to successfully deploy non-SDN scenarios and pass Functest smoke tests. MS5 requires that features have finished implementation and that all scenarios are setup in Jenkins. Any additional installer updates would need to be completed by MS6. David On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:01 AM, Tahhan, Maryam <maryam.tah...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi David > > Can you please clarify Milestone 3 (Installer integration with OpenStack) > in the context of Milestone 5 (Scenario integration and Feature Freeze). > > Milestone 3 is just an installer update with existing plugins (c > plugins)? Is this correct? In which case when do installer updates occur > for features included in Milestone 5? > > > > Thanks in advance > > Maryam > > > > *From:* opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Monday, September 12, 2016 10:52 PM > *To:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule > > > > Reminder... if you haven't yet reviewed the schedule, please do so before > the TSC and release meetings on Tuesday, where it will likely be discussed. > > > > David > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:45 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Team, > > > > I've posted an update to the schedule > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/6827418/OPNFV%20Release%20%2522D%2522%20r2.pdf?version=1=1473367413338=v2>. > Please review and provide feedback. > > > > Note: during the release meeting on Tuesday, we discussed removing the > JIRA milestone, since it was not considered release gating. Since then, > I've changed my mind. For the D-release, I expect that we will have > implemented our JIRA processes sufficiently that we will be able to rely on > JIRA to understand project status. Therefore, it is appropriate to believe > that if we still have unresolved JIRA issues assigned to the release, then > the release is not complete. We will be discussing exactly how this will > be accomplished in the coming weeks. > > > > David > > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > > > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] Release call CANCELLED this week
I'm not sure whether everyone is rushing over to OpenStack, or if they just did not see the update to the release meeting this week, but we only had a few people on the call, so I cancelled the meeting this week. We will resume next week at the usual time on Tuesday. Sorry for the confusion. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] MS1 - Planning - October 25 (tomorrow)
Team, Tomorrow (Oct 25) is our MS1 (planning) date for the Danube release. Please complete the release plan for your respective projects. Also, be sure to complete the new planning template <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Projects+Intending+to+Participate+in+the+Danube+Release>. At this time, I'm still waiting to get the plans for about 1/3 of the projects. Also, I have been neglecting to remind you that our planning milestone includes adding planned scenarios to the Danube scenario status page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Danube+Scenario+Status>. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][colorado] Colorado 2.0 is live
Team, Congratulations on your efforts! Colorado 2.0 is now live. https://www.opnfv.org/software/download David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: Re: 答复: Daisy4nfv build
-y python-kombu > yum install -y python-lesscpy > yum install -y python-lockfile > yum install -y python-migrate > yum install -y python-oslo-concurrency > yum install -y python-oslo-config > yum install -y python-oslo-i18n > yum install -y python-oslo-serialization > yum install -y python-oslo-sphinx > yum install -y python-oslo-utils > yum install -y python-pbr > yum install -y python-pint > yum install -y python-pygments > yum install -y python-routes > yum install -y python-scss > yum install -y python-six > yum install -y python-sphinx > yum install -y python-sqlalchemy > yum install -y python-sqlalchemy > yum install -y python-webob > yum install -y python-XStatic > yum install -y python-XStatic-Angular > yum install -y python-XStatic-Angular-Bootstrap > yum install -y python-XStatic-Angular-lrdragndrop > yum install -y python-XStatic-Angular-Mock > yum install -y python-XStatic-Bootstrap-Datepicker > yum install -y python-XStatic-Bootstrap-SCSS > yum install -y python-XStatic-D3 > yum install -y python-XStatic-Font-Awesome > yum install -y python-XStatic-Hogan > yum install -y python-XStatic-Jasmine > yum install -y python-XStatic-jQuery > yum install -y python-XStatic-JQuery-Migrate > yum install -y python-XStatic-JQuery-quicksearch > yum install -y python-XStatic-JQuery-TableSorter > yum install -y python-XStatic-jquery-ui > yum install -y python-XStatic-JSEncrypt > yum install -y python-XStatic-Magic-Search > yum install -y python-XStatic-QUnit > yum install -y python-XStatic-Rickshaw > yum install -y python-XStatic-smart-table > yum install -y python-XStatic-Spin > yum install -y python-XStatic-termjs > > > Thank you so much. > > Best regards, > > JingSun > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > > > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [SFC] SFC cooperation with Compass4nfv
Don't forget to update the Danube scenario status page if you decide to deploy those scenarios on Compass. Thanks. David On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Brady Allen Johnson < brady.allen.john...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > Justin,Compass. > > I added the OPNFV SFC tech discuss list to share this with the rest of the > community. > > Currently we have the following scenarios for SFC: > >- os-odl_l2-sfc-ha >- os-odl_l2-sfc-noha > > > And we will be creating this new scenario to work with the FD.io VPP > virtual switch: > >- os-odl_l2-fdio-ha > > > Please let us know how we can help to integrate SFC with Compass. > > Thanks, > > Brady > > On 04/11/16 03:35, Chigang (Justin) wrote: > > Hi Brady, > > I am Justin, from Compass4nfv team, I have made a Compass4nfv Danube plan > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/compass4nfv/Compass4nfv+Danube>, any > comments are welcome. > > I hope service function chaining will be a scenario in Danube release. > > And Yifei Xue has some expericence in opendaylight, and he intent to > integrate service-function-chaining in Compass4nfv in Danube. > > I hope you can give necessary help if he needed. > > Thanks > Justin > > > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Reminder - MS1 (project release plan) is fast approaching - Oct 25
Team, Just a reminder that MS1 (project release plan) is coming up in 12 days (Oct 25). This means two things: (1) Intent to participate window is closing. We've had 40 projects declare their intent to participate in the Danube release, so far. You can see the list here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Projects+Intending+to+Participate+in+the+Danube+Release>. After Oct 25, you will need to be granted an exception by the TSC to join the release. (2) Project release planning complete. You must have your project release plan in place NLT Oct 25. Also, please recall that, as part of release planning, I've requested that all projects complete a new template <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Project+Release+Plans+for+Danube>. Thus far, only 25% of participating projects have completed the template. Please don't wait until the last minute. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [opnfvdocs] Documentation updates for Colorado 2.0
Hi Billy, Just a reminder that we also have the Colorado 2.0 daily (M, Th, Fri) which Sofia often attends, if you have questions. This is IRC only on channel opnfv-release. David On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:56 AM, O Mahony, Billy <billy.o.mah...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi Sofia, > > I am standing in for Mark Gray as OVSNFV PTL while he is on vacation. > > We are not making any documentation changes for colorado2.0. > > Can you clarify the actions I need to take regarding to the doc updates > for Colorado2.0 as the link as the advice below seems to be in conflict. > > - Do I need to update all references/links in my documentation that reads > ' colorado/docs' to 'colorado/2.0/docs' ? > - Do I check these git patches in to master? > - Do I then cherry-pick these changes to Colorado? > - Do I need to tag Colorado branch with Colorado2.0? When is this to be > done? > - What does step 4. 'Re-merge' mean? > - Anything else? > > Thanks, > Billy. > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:opnfv-tech- > > discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aric Gardner > > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 2:47 PM > > To: Sofia Wallin <sofia.wal...@ericsson.com> > > Cc: opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV (opnfv-tech- > > disc...@lists.opnfv.org) <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [opnfvdocs] > > Documentation updates for Colorado 2.0 > > > > Quick edit, > > > > > 2, Cherrypick to Colorado 2.0 > > > > is just Cherrypick to Colorado > > > > The remerge is what does the work, as all documentation merged after the > > colorado release will be put in the 2.0 folder. > > > > -Aric > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Sofia Wallin <sofia.wal...@ericsson.com > > > > wrote: > > > Thank you Jonas for clarifying! > > > > > > > > > > > > All project must re-merge their documentation so that it gets updated > > > to Colorado.2.0. > > > > > > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/opnfvdocs/colorado/2.0/docs/documentation/i > > > ndex.html > > > > > > No matter if any updates has been made or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > How to do it, > > > > > > 1, Do your editorial updates and/or link updates > > > > > > 2, Cherrypick to Colorado 2.0 > > > > > > 3, Tag according to tagging procedure > > > > > > 4, Re-merge > > > > > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > Sofia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Jonas Bjurel > > > Sent: den 11 oktober 2016 23:21 > > > To: Sofia Wallin <sofia.wal...@ericsson.com>; > > > opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > > > (opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org) > > > <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; > > > Fatih Degirmenci <fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>; Ryota > > > <r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com>; David McBride > > <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>; > > > Christopher Price <christopher.pr...@ericsson.com> > > > Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [opnfvdocs] > > > Documentation updates for Colorado 2.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > Adding to Sofia’s point, please be aware that any documentation built > > > for the Colorado 2.0 release will end up in a different OPNFV > > > artifacts name-space. This means that links have to be reviewed and > > verified. > > > > > > And in many case this means a complete new docs set for the projects – > > > as the name-space change propagates through all links. > > > > > > BR/Jonas > > > > > > > > > > > > From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org > > > [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Sofia > > > Wallin > > > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 4:46 PM > > > To: opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > > > (opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org) > > > <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > > Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [opnfvdocs] > > > Documentation updates for Colorado 2.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > Please note that if any documentation has been updated for Colorado > > > 2.0 links in the OPNFV overall docume
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Apex] C3.0 artifacts for Apex
Thanks, Tim. On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Tim Rozet <tro...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hey Aric, David, > Here are the artifacts built for release: > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/apex/colorado/opnfv-2016-12-05.iso > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/apex/colorado/opnfv-apex-3.0- > 20161205.noarch.rpm > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/apex/colorado/opnfv-apex- > common-3.0-20161205.noarch.rpm > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/apex/colorado/opnfv-apex-onos- > 3.0-20161205.noarch.rpm > http://artifacts.opnfv.org/apex/colorado/opnfv-apex- > undercloud-3.0-20161205.noarch.rpm > > Thanks, > > Tim Rozet > Red Hat SDN Team > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] proposed schedule slip for MS5 and MS6
Reminder - discussion and vote tomorrow at TSC meeting. On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > This week, I learned that the system migration in the OPNFV Intel lab has > had a larger impact than expected. The migration has hindered many OPNFV > projects from making progress toward MS5, which is currently scheduled for > January 13. > > Therefore, I am recommending to the TSC that we slip MS5 by two weeks to > January 27 and MS6 by three weeks to Feb 17. I'm recommending that MS6 be > slipped by more than MS5 in order to avoid the Chinese New Year holiday in > early February. > > At this time, I am *not* recommending that we slip the release date > (March 27) for Danube. This will reduce the time between scenario > integration (MS5) and stable branch (MS7) from 8 weeks to 6 weeks. This > will put some pressure on the project teams and the scenario owners to > stabilize scenarios in less time than expected. However, since we don't > yet have a lot of data on how much time this actually requires (which, > itself, is a moving target), then I think we should test whether we can > maintain the schedule for stable branch, and subsequent milestones. > > The TSC will discuss and vote on this proposed schedule change at the next > TSC meeting on January 10. In the mean time, please feel free to respond > to this mail with your thoughts on this change. Thanks. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Keystone v2 or v3?
Thanks, Justin. Valid points. We will be discussing this at the release meeting tomorrow. I hope that you can join us. David On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Chigang (Justin) <chig...@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi David & Community, > > It brings lots of work to testing group, such as differents Keystone API > version adaptation developments, disabling healthcheck...etc. > It is not sure that whether other differents configuration will bring more > workloads to testing group. > May I have a suggestion for listing the Openstack configurations in > advance to identify the additional development > effort that results from different configurations. Just my 2 cents. > > Best Regards > Justin > > > 在 2017/1/10 7:21, David McBride 写道: > > Thanks for the feedback. I've summarized your responses in a table on the > following page: > > https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Keystone+API+ > Usage+per+Installer+in+Danube > > Please review and let me know if you see any mistakes. > > David > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 10:15 AM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Installer teams, >> >> I'm following up on an action from Dec 20 to determine which version of >> the Keystone API each installer is using. >> >> Please respond to this email with the installer name and 'v2' or 'v3'. >> >> Thanks. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] short release meeting next week (Jan 17)
Team, I have a conflict at 9 a.m. (PST) next Tuesday, so I will be cutting the release meeting short by 15 minutes. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] proposed schedule slip for MS5 and MS6
Team, In case you weren't on the call this morning, the TSC approved the proposed schedule slip. I will be updating the schedule on the Danube release page this week. Let me know if you have any questions. David On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:46 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Reminder - discussion and vote tomorrow at TSC meeting. > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Team, >> >> This week, I learned that the system migration in the OPNFV Intel lab has >> had a larger impact than expected. The migration has hindered many OPNFV >> projects from making progress toward MS5, which is currently scheduled for >> January 13. >> >> Therefore, I am recommending to the TSC that we slip MS5 by two weeks to >> January 27 and MS6 by three weeks to Feb 17. I'm recommending that MS6 be >> slipped by more than MS5 in order to avoid the Chinese New Year holiday in >> early February. >> >> At this time, I am *not* recommending that we slip the release date >> (March 27) for Danube. This will reduce the time between scenario >> integration (MS5) and stable branch (MS7) from 8 weeks to 6 weeks. This >> will put some pressure on the project teams and the scenario owners to >> stabilize scenarios in less time than expected. However, since we don't >> yet have a lot of data on how much time this actually requires (which, >> itself, is a moving target), then I think we should test whether we can >> maintain the schedule for stable branch, and subsequent milestones. >> >> The TSC will discuss and vote on this proposed schedule change at the >> next TSC meeting on January 10. In the mean time, please feel free to >> respond to this mail with your thoughts on this change. Thanks. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] Colorado 3.0 release TODAY!
If you haven't already done so, please tag your project. Also, make sure that your documentation links have been updated. Instructions here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Colorado+2.0+and+3.0>. This should be done no later than 12 p.m. (PST). We are having our final Colorado 3.0 daily today at 8 a.m. (PST). This is an IRC-only meeting on channel opnfv-release. If you have any questions about the release, please join. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] proposed schedule slip for MS5 and MS6
Team, This week, I learned that the system migration in the OPNFV Intel lab has had a larger impact than expected. The migration has hindered many OPNFV projects from making progress toward MS5, which is currently scheduled for January 13. Therefore, I am recommending to the TSC that we slip MS5 by two weeks to January 27 and MS6 by three weeks to Feb 17. I'm recommending that MS6 be slipped by more than MS5 in order to avoid the Chinese New Year holiday in early February. At this time, I am *not* recommending that we slip the release date (March 27) for Danube. This will reduce the time between scenario integration (MS5) and stable branch (MS7) from 8 weeks to 6 weeks. This will put some pressure on the project teams and the scenario owners to stabilize scenarios in less time than expected. However, since we don't yet have a lot of data on how much time this actually requires (which, itself, is a moving target), then I think we should test whether we can maintain the schedule for stable branch, and subsequent milestones. The TSC will discuss and vote on this proposed schedule change at the next TSC meeting on January 10. In the mean time, please feel free to respond to this mail with your thoughts on this change. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][colorado] Colorado download page updated to include workaround for Fuel
Excellent - thank you! On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Serg Melikyan <smelik...@mirantis.com> wrote: > David, > > issue with Fuel was fixed in upstream repositories and we can remove > notification about workaround from the download page. Official Mirantis > technical bulletin was published explaining the issue [0]. > > References: > > [0] https://content.mirantis.com/rs/451-RBY-185/images/ > Mirantis-Technical-Bulletin-33-systemd.pdf > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Serg Melikyan <smelik...@mirantis.com> > wrote: > >> Thank you, David. I expect that by end of this week this workaround >> will be obsolete and issue will be fixed in the updates repository, >> right now Mirantis Downstream Team is working on acceptance testing >> for the fix. >> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:28 PM, David McBride >> <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> > At the release meeting this week, we discussed an issue with Fuel (x86) >> on >> > Colorado. The team agreed to publish a workaround for the issue. That >> > workaround is now available on the download page. Please let me know >> if you >> > have any comments. >> > >> > Many thanks to Serg Melikyan for developing, verifying, and documenting >> the >> > workaround. >> > >> > David >> > >> > -- >> > David McBride >> > Release Manager, OPNFV >> > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 <(805)%20276-8018> >> > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> > Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> > IRC: dmcbride >> >> >> >> -- >> Serg Melikyan, Development Manager at Mirantis, Inc. >> http://mirantis.com | smelik...@mirantis.com | +1 (650) 440-8979 >> <(650)%20440-8979> >> > > > > -- > Serg Melikyan, Development Manager at Mirantis, Inc. > http://mirantis.com | smelik...@mirantis.com | +1 (650) 440-8979 > <(650)%20440-8979> > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] K8 scenario testing on Joid
This is a follow-up to a conversation on IRC (opnfv-release) earlier today. When asked about disabling Functest and Yardstick for the new K8 scenarios on Joid, I agreed. My reasoning was that I didn't want to delay release of new and potentially interesting scenarios. I also know that functest and yardstick testing is not always applicable to every feature or configuration. In addition, I was aware that the K8 scenarios had project-specific testing. My initial thought was that the disabled tests would be documented in the release notes and that the project would be required to contribute tests to functest and yardstick for the following release. Subsequently, after some discussion, I realized that I had made a mistake and that this is something that the test working group should weigh in on, at a minimum. Therefore, please disregard my earlier direction about disabling the tests. The tests are still required for all scenarios until the test working group and/or the TSC indicate otherwise. Let me know if you have any questions. Sorry for the confusion. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] revised schedule for release
Team,
The TSC voted this morning to change the release date to Friday, March 31.
I will be updating the schedule on the wiki, but here is a summary of what
will happen this week.
Note: on the release call this morning, I said that MS9 would be on
Wednesday. However, it was pointed out that finishing up the documentation
includes resolving and closing JIRA tickets, so I decided that it would
make more sense to schedule it on the same day as the documentation
completion.
- Wednesday, March 29
- MS8 - end of formal testing and data collection
- Thursday, March 30
- MS9 - JIRA cleanup
- MS10 - complete documentation
- Friday, March 31, 3 p.m. PDT
- PTLs tag projects
<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube>
- Note that we are using an "RC" tag, initially, for this release.
You can apply this tag while you are completing your final reviews, etc.,
then once you are certain that you are done, then you can apply the "1.0"
tag.
David
--
*David McBride*
Release Manager, OPNFV
Mobile: +1.805.276.8018
Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
Skype: davidjmcbride1
IRC: dmcbride
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Intent-to-Participate window for Euphrates
Team, I'm excited to announce that the intent-to-participate window will open on Monday, March 27, and will remain open until 5 p.m. on April 24 (MS1). The process is documented here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Project+Inclusion+in+OPNFV+Release>, but essentially just requires sending an email to the TSC mailing list. Note that your project must have been approved by the TSC before you may join a release. Once you have stated your intent to participate, you must complete your release planning by MS1 on April 24. This includes completing the release plan summary <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates> . Please let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status
Team, As you may be aware, the TSC determined on Tuesday that they do not have enough information to vote on the Danube 1.0 release. Therefore: - The vote on the release will be deferred to the next TSC meeting on Tues, March 28 - This means that we are no longer planning to release on Mon, March 27, as originally planned. - A revised schedule for release will be developed based on input from scenario owners and test framework PTLs. - The Release Manager will poll the scenario owners and test framework PTLs to assess the confidence level for releasing with different schedule offsets. I will update this thread as I gather additional data and decisions are made. In the mean time, please continue to work hard toward the release, as I know you are. Let me know if you have questions or concerns. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status
Thanks, Brady. Sorry I missed your previous mail. MS9 and 10 are offsets of the release, so if the release date is changed, then MS9 and 10 will change, accordingly. David On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Brady Allen Johnson < brady.allen.john...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > David, > > I asked in an email previous to this the following questions: > > Considering the Danube 1.0 release will be delayed by at least 1 week, > what is the status of Milestones 9 and 10? > > Milestone 9 is due today, March 22 and requires us to have all the JIRAs > closed and/or assigned to subsequent releases. Does this still make sense > if we will still be working on fixing problems? > > Milestone 10 is due on Friday, March 24. This probably makes more sense to > maintain, but then we might have MS10 before MS9. > > > Brady > > -Original Message- > *From*: David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > <david%20mcbride%20%3cdmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org%3e>> > *To*: TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <tech-discuss%20opnfv%20%3copnfv-tech-disc...@lists.opnfv.org%3e>>, > opnfv-project-leads <opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > <opnfv-project-leads%20%3copnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org%3e>> > *Cc*: TSC OPNFV <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > <tsc%20opnfv%20%3copnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org%3e>> > *Subject*: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status > *Date*: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:27:25 -0700 > > Team, > > As you may be aware, the TSC determined on Tuesday that they do not have > enough information to vote on the Danube 1.0 release. Therefore: > >- The vote on the release will be deferred to the next TSC meeting on >Tues, March 28 >- This means that we are no longer planning to release on Mon, March >27, as originally planned. >- A revised schedule for release will be developed based on input from >scenario owners and test framework PTLs. >- The Release Manager will poll the scenario owners and test framework >PTLs to assess the confidence level for releasing with different schedule >offsets. > > I will update this thread as I gather additional data and decisions are > made. In the mean time, please continue to work hard toward the release, > as I know you are. > > Let me know if you have questions or concerns. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing > listopnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.orghttps://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] revised schedule for release
Team, If you have not yet tagged your project, please do so immediately. We have less than two hours until the release deadline (3 p.m. PDT). Thanks. David On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:44 PM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > The TSC voted this morning to change the release date to Friday, March > 31. I will be updating the schedule on the wiki, but here is a summary of > what will happen this week. > > Note: on the release call this morning, I said that MS9 would be on > Wednesday. However, it was pointed out that finishing up the documentation > includes resolving and closing JIRA tickets, so I decided that it would > make more sense to schedule it on the same day as the documentation > completion. > >- Wednesday, March 29 > - MS8 - end of formal testing and data collection >- Thursday, March 30 > - MS9 - JIRA cleanup > - MS10 - complete documentation >- Friday, March 31, 3 p.m. PDT > - PTLs tag projects > > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube> > - Note that we are using an "RC" tag, initially, for this release. > You can apply this tag while you are completing your final reviews, > etc., > then once you are certain that you are done, then you can apply the > "1.0" > tag. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Intent-to-Release for Danube scenarios
Scenario Owners, I need to get an idea of which scenarios will be releasing with Danube 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0, respectively. I've modified the scenario status page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Danube+Scenario+Status> to add columns for intent-to-release. Please update the table to indicate your plans. In addition, I've also generated a scenario status table for Euphrates. So, if you believe that you will not be able to release your scenario with Danube, you may move your scenario to the Euphrates scenario status page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status> . IMPORTANT NOTE! PLEASE READ CAREFULLY! 1. Please be aware that you must support your scenario for each release subsequent to when you first plan to release. - For example, if you release in Danube 1.0, then you MUST also support a release in 2.0 and 3.0. - Similarly, if you first release your scenario in 2.0, then you must support a release in 3.0. - Why does this matter? If your scenario becomes broken after your initial release, you will need to fix it for each subsequent release. Make sure that you are planning for this possibility. - We only support the most recent minor release of any major release. This means that 2.0 replaces 1.0 and 3.0 replaces 2.0. - Therefore, if you release your scenario in 1.0, and it is broken as we approach 2.0, and you don't fix it, your work is effectively gone because 1.0 will no longer be available. 2. Installers MUST support ALL three releases, regardless of what your dependent scenarios are doing. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] schedule change for MS1
Team, As you know, Milestone 1 is the deadline for intent-to-participate, and for project release plans. On the TSC call this morning, some community members said that they would like to use the upcoming plugfest to finalized their release planning for Euphrates. Therefore, based on consent of the TSC, MS1 has been moved out 8 days to May 2, which is the Tuesday following the week of plugfest. No other milestones are effected. The Euphrates release schedule <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates> has been updated, accordingly. Please let me know if you have questions or comments. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] MS7 - stable branch TODAY at 12 p.m. (PST)
Here's the list of projects that will be branched: 1. apex 2. armband 3. availability 4. barometer 5. bottlenecks 6. compass4nfv 7. copper 8. doctor 9. domino 10. fds 11. fuel 12. functest 13. ipv6 14. joid 15. kvmfornfv 16. models 17. multisite 18. netready 19. opera 20. opnfvdocs 21. orchestra 22. parser 23. promise 24. qtip 25. sdnvpn 26. securityscanning 27. sfc 28. storperf 29. ves 30. vswitchperf 31. yardstick On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:22 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > In about 3.5 hours, the stable branch window will be closed for Danube. > Let me know if you have any questions. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] MS7 - stable branch TODAY at 12 p.m. (PST)
In about 3.5 hours, the stable branch window will be closed for Danube. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [FUNCTEST] [SNAPS-OO] Danube release
+Aric Let's branch to ensure functionality, but defer "official" inclusion of SNAPS-OO until the Euphrates release. Thanks. David On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Steven Pisarski <s.pisar...@cablelabs.com> wrote: > Hi Morgan and Jose, > > > > As SNAPS-OO is not officially part of the Danube release but is pointed to > by the Functest Dockerfile and the BRANCH variable. So my question to you > and the overall community is whether or not SNAPS-OO should have a > stable/danube branch cut or should FUNCTEST remove the $BRANCH from the git > clone command? I believe a branch should be cut but wanted raise the > potential issue before things start breaking. > > > > Best, > > Steve > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][danube] MS7 - stable branch window closes March 10
Hi Brady, See separate email for list. SFC is planned for branching today. David On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Brady Allen Johnson < brady.allen.john...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > Aric, > > Thanks for the info. > > Im assuming SFC is considered a "participating project". If not, can you > still branch our project please? > > We're ready to go for MS7 and for the branching, so whenever you're ready, > branch away from the latest commit :) > > Thanks, > > Brady > > > -Original Message- > *From*: David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > <david%20mcbride%20%3cdmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org%3e>> > *To*: Aric Gardner <agard...@linuxfoundation.org > <aric%20gardner%20%3cagard...@linuxfoundation.org%3e>> > *Cc*: opnfv-project-leads <opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > <opnfv-project-leads%20%3copnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org%3e>>, > Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org > <raymond%20paik%20%3crp...@linuxfoundation.org%3e>>, > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <%22opnfv-tech-disc...@lists.opnfv.org%22%20%3copnfv-tech-disc...@lists.opnfv.org%3e>>, > Tapio Tallgren <tapio.tallg...@nokia.com > <tapio%20tallgren%20%3ctapio.tallg...@nokia.com%3e>> > *Subject*: Re: [opnfv-project-leads] [release][danube] MS7 - stable > branch window closes March 10 > *Date*: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 13:00:27 -0800 > > Thanks, Aric. Sorry for the confusion, Mark. > > David > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Aric Gardner <agard...@linuxfoundation.org > > wrote: > > Hi Mark, Yujun, David > > Only Gerrit admins can create branches. I will create the Danube > branch from head of all participating projects on March 10th. If > anything special needs to be done in this regard, (eg branching from a > older ref) please contact me via irc or helpdesk > And as a clarification, Mark you are correct, no tagging needs to be > done for this milestone, tagging is for the final release. > > Regards, > Aric > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> > wrote: > > Hello, David. > > > > The tagging instructions in the wiki [1] do not work, as it appears to > > assume there is already a stable/danube branch created. The instructions > > appear to be for the release of Danube 1.0 after the work has been done > in > > stable/danube. > > > > Am I missing something? > > > > [1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instruction > s+for+Danube > > > > Regards, > > Mark > > > > Mark Beierl > > Advisory Solutions Architect > > Dell EMC | Office of the CTO > > mobile +1 613 314 8106 > > mark.bei...@dell.com > > > > On Mar 2, 2017, at 14:28, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > > wrote: > > > > PTLs, > > > > The stable branch window for Danube opened on February 17 (MS6). The > window > > will close one week from Friday, on March 10 at 12 p.m. (PST). Please > plan > > to branch your project by that date. > > > > Any projects not branched by the PTL by MS7 will be branched by LF > (Aric). > > > > You may find tagging instructions here. > > > > Please contact me, or Aric, if you have any questions. Thanks. > > > > David > > > > -- > > David McBride > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > > _______ > > opnfv-project-leads mailing list > > opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org > > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-project-leads > > > > > > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > > ___ > opnfv-project-leads mailing > listopnfv-project-leads@lists.opnfv.orghttps://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-project-leads > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] New projects for OPNFV "E" release
Reminder... if you are planning on a new project for OPNFV that you would like to release in 2017, get your proposal into the TSC NOW! Intent to participate opens in just two weeks! On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:42 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Team, > > We've started the final third of the Danube release cycle and it's time to > think about the next release. On March 27 (tentative), the window will > open for projects to state intent to participate in the "E" release. > > Recall that new projects must first get approval from the TSC to become > part of OPNFV *before* they may join a release. This requires a minimum > of two weeks, following the submission of a new project proposal > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Project+Proposals> to the TSC. > > Therefore, if you are considering a new project for OPNFV, now is the time > to get your proposal into the TSC for review. DO NOT wait until March. > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] MS7 - stable branch window closes March 10
PTLs, The stable branch window for Danube opened on February 17 (MS6). The window will close one week from Friday, on March 10 at 12 p.m. (PST). Please plan to branch your project by that date. Any projects not branched by the PTL by MS7 will be branched by LF (Aric). You may find tagging instructions here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube>. Please contact me, or Aric, if you have any questions. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][danube] MS7 - stable branch window closes March 10
Yes, that's true. - D On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Yujun Zhang (ZTE) <zhangyujun+...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, David > > Does that mean the branch will be created anyway by Mar 10th? > > I need to get it confirmed since I will be on business trip next week. It > would be very helpful if LF can do it on the deadline in case I missed it. > > -- > Yujun > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:29 AM David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > >> PTLs, >> >> The stable branch window for Danube opened on February 17 (MS6). The >> window will close one week from Friday, on March 10 at 12 p.m. (PST). >> Please plan to branch your project by that date. >> >> Any projects not branched by the PTL by MS7 will be branched by LF (Aric). >> >> You may find tagging instructions here >> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube> >> . >> >> Please contact me, or Aric, if you have any questions. Thanks. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> _______ >> opnfv-project-leads mailing list >> opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org >> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-project-leads >> > -- > Yujun Zhang > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] OPNFV Danube 1.0 release
Team, I'm pleased to report to you that we have completed the Danube 1.0 release. Congratulations and thanks to the project teams, test framework teams, installer teams, infra team, and docs team for contributing to this release. The download page will go live on Tuesday, April 4. Please be aware that Danube 2.0 is still scheduled for May 4. Also, if you have not yet stated your intent to participate in Euphrates <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Project+Inclusion+in+OPNFV+Release>, please do so ASAP. Onward to Euphrates! David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] MS1 - planning - May 2
Team, Hopefully you saw my email earlier this week, alerting you to the fact that the TSC voted to move the date for MS1 out about 1 week to May 2, thereby enabling project teams to complete their planning for Euphrates at the plugfest in late April. I've been updating the Release Milestone Description <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Release+Milestone+Description+for+Euphrates> page to provide more clarity about the requirements for each milestone. This is based both on an improved understanding of the release process on my part, as well as some adjustments to the requirements, themselves. Please take a few moments to review the requirements for MS0 - 4, especially. I will continue to work on this as we move forward. However, for MS1 specifically, I wanted to highlight the requirements, since many of you are actively working on your release planning. Requirements for MS1 - release planning - Complete a release plan. The format of the release plan is up to the PTL and project team. - Complete the release plan summary <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates>, which includes a link to the release plan. - Feature projects complete the CI resource requirements <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Project+CI+Resource+Requirements+for+Euphrates> table. The last bullet is a new requirement for Euphrates. This requirement is based on discussions that I've had with the Infra team. The goal is to understand the requirements for each participating project, and then to aggregate those requirements in order to understand the total requirement for CI resources for the release. Let me know if you have any questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] CANCELLED- OPNFV Release Meeting (ASIA) - IRC Only
I have an unavoidable conflict and need to cancel this week's meeting. I'm looking forward to seeing many of you at next week's Plugfest in Paris. Please email me with any specific questions. Reminders: * Euphrates intent to participate and release planning moved out to May 5 * Danube 2.0 releases May 2 David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 <javascript:void(0);> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] change to OPNFV Euphrates release schedule
Team, On Tuesday, August 1, the TSC voted to push the release schedule for Euphrates out by 2 weeks, beginning with Milestone 5. The reason for the change was that we had a significant number (12) of milestone exception requests that all wanted to push MS5 out by about 2 weeks. So, rather than process each of these exception requests, the members of the TSC agreed that it would be simpler to just revise the schedule. So, Milestone 5 is now scheduled for August 11; Milestone 6 is scheduled for August 25, etc. See the Euphrates release page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates> for a link to the entire, updated schedule. Let me know if you have questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status for TSC call July 11
Summary of scenarios that currently fail to deploy *Scenario* *Installer* *Released with D1/ D2* *Notes* os-nosdn-kvm-noha Apex yes os-odl_l2-sfc-noha Apex no withdrawn os-nosdn-fdio-noha Apex yes trozet says that fail is related to installer os-onos-nofeature-ha Apex no withdrawn os-nosdn-nofeature-ha Compass yes failure tied to build server os-odl_l2-nofeature-ha Compass yes failure tied to build server os-odl_l3-nofeature-ha Compass yes failure tied to build server os-onos-sfc-ha Compass no failure tied to build server os-nosdn-openo-ha Compass yes failure tied to build server os-nosdn-nofeature-noha JOID yes failure tied to build server k8-nosdn-nofeature-noha JOID yes failure tied to build server k8-nosdn-lb-noha JOID yes failure tied to build server All of the scenarios that were previously released in D1 or D2 have valid explanations for why they are currently failing that are unrelated to the scenario, itself, with one exception: os-nosdn-kvm-noha. So, I would say that is the one regression from previous releases in Danube. Yes, the plan is to release every scenario that has been previously released, as well as any scenarios that are new, as of D3. David On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Ulrich Kleber <ulrich.kle...@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi David, > > thank you for this summary. > > > > However, I have a question about the scenarios failing to deploy now. > Could you summarize, which of those scenarios were part of Danube 1.0 or > 2.0? > > Our goal was to include 1.0 and 2.0 contents also in 3.0. What is your > proposal? > > > > Cheers, > > Uli > > > > > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *David McBride > *Sent:* Tuesday, 11 July, 2017 02:12 > *To:* TSC OPNFV > *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status > for TSC call July 11 > > > > TSC members, > > > > Please find slides attached with Danube 3 summary. Reminder that the > release is scheduled for Friday, July 14. We will be discussing status and > voting on the release on the call tomorrow (July 11). > > > > David > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Milestone 3.2 - installers deploy scenario with integrated SDN and pass health check
Installer teams, Milestone 3.2 is scheduled for tomorrow, July 11. Please provide the following: - Identify a scenario that includes an integrated SDN controller that demonstrates that your installer meets the requirements of MS3.2. - Provide a pointer to test results that demonstrate that health check passes for the identified scenario. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [announce] Reminder: TSC meeting time change starting this week
Note that the release meeting is also moving an hour earlier, so it will continue to follow immediately after the TSC call. David On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:53 AM, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > All, > > A reminder that the weekly TSC meetings will now start an hour earlier at > 6am Pacific Time starting tomorrow (July 11th). For those of you in the > Pacific Time zone, get your extra cup of coffee :-) > > Thanks, > > Ray > > ___ > opnfv-tsc mailing list > opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] intel pod21 accessing issue
Narinder, Could we please get an update on the status of Joid for Danube 3? Reminder that the release is scheduled for this week (July 14). Thanks. David On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Narinder Gupta <narinder.gu...@canonical.com > wrote: > DAvid, > Yes I worked on it today and now Intel pod21 is reconnected to CI but it > might be a day or two once all scenario run once though. > > Thanks and Regards, > Narinder > > On Jul 1, 2017, at 6:10 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > Narinder & Ross, > > What's the status? Is Joid connected to CI? If not, what's the estimate > for when it will be connected? Thanks. > > David > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:59 AM Brattain, Ross B < > ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Yes, we just rebooted. >> >> >> >> *From:* David McBride [mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:55 AM >> *To:* Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> >> *Cc:* Brattain, Ross B <ross.b.bratt...@intel.com>; Narinder Gupta < >> narinder.gu...@canonical.com>; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < >> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; Cooper, Trevor < >> trevor.coo...@intel.com> >> *Subject:* Re: intel pod21 accessing issue >> >> >> >> +Trevor, tech-discuss >> >> >> >> Team, >> >> >> >> There seems to be a systemic issue with Intel PODs, beyond the issue >> originally reported by Narinder. See Mark's comments in the thread below. >> >> >> >> Ross / Trevor - could you please look into this ASAP? Thanks. >> >> >> >> David >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> It would appear that not just pod 21 is affected. Pod 24 is in the same >> situation where the VPN is failing to pass any traffic. From Jenkins [1] I >> can see that nearly every Intel pod is offline. This means no daily jobs >> can run. >> >> >> >> Ross, is there someone at Intel that should be contacted, or are you the >> virtual Jack while he's off? >> >> >> >> David, a broadcast to the opnfv-test-discuss list is probably a good idea >> so that everyone is aware of this outage. >> >> >> >> [1] https://build.opnfv.org/ci/computer/ >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> *Mark Beierl* >> >> SW System Sr Principal Engineer >> >> *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO >> >> mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> >> >> *mark.bei...@dell.com <mark.bei...@dell.com>* >> >> >> >> On Jun 28, 2017, at 08:40, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> It appears to be the same problem for me. Once connected to the VPN, I >> cannot route any traffic: >> >> >> >> Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=943655 /sbin/ip link set dev tun0 up mtu 1500 >> >> Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=946972 /sbin/ip addr add dev tun0 local >> 10.10.210.205 peer 10.10.210.206 >> >> Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=953666 /sbin/ip route add 10.10.210.0/24 via >> 10.10.210.206 >> >> >> >> ping 10.10.210.206 >> >> PING 10.10.210.206 (10.10.210.206) 56(84) bytes of data. >> >> --- 10.10.210.206 ping statistics --- >> >> 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2030ms >> >> >> >> ping 10.10.210.1 >> >> PING 10.10.210.1 (10.10.210.1) 56(84) bytes of data. >> >> --- 10.10.210.1 ping statistics --- >> >> 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2029ms >> >> >> >> Looks like something is wrong with the VPN server. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> *Mark Beierl* >> >> SW System Sr Principal Engineer >> >> *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO >> >> mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> >> >> *mark.bei...@dell.com <mark.bei...@dell.com>* >> >> >> >> On Jun 27, 2017, at 22:41, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> +Mark >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Narinder Gupta < >> narinder.gu...@canonical.com> wrote: >> >> Ross, >> >> It was working but suddenly it stopped responding now and this tim
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube 3 release on July 14
Reminder... On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Reminder... as approved by the TSC last week, Danube 3 will be released 1 > week from tomorrow on July 14. The schedule is as follows: > >- July 12 - complete testing >- July 13 - finish document updates / update JIRA >- July 14 - tag repos and release >- Week of July 17 - download page goes live > > Let me know if you have questions. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube 3 release on July 14
Reminder - testing should be complete today, followed by documentation and JIRA updates tomorrow. Let me know if you have questions. David On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:27 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Reminder... > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Reminder... as approved by the TSC last week, Danube 3 will be released 1 >> week from tomorrow on July 14. The schedule is as follows: >> >>- July 12 - complete testing >>- July 13 - finish document updates / update JIRA >>- July 14 - tag repos and release >>- Week of July 17 - download page goes live >> >> Let me know if you have questions. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube 3 release on July 14
If you haven't already done so, please tag your repo by the end of the day (5 p.m. Pacific). Tagging instructions here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube>. David On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:27 AM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Reminder - testing should be complete today, followed by documentation and > JIRA updates tomorrow. Let me know if you have questions. > > David > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:27 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Reminder... >> >> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, David McBride < >> dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> Reminder... as approved by the TSC last week, Danube 3 will be released >>> 1 week from tomorrow on July 14. The schedule is as follows: >>> >>>- July 12 - complete testing >>>- July 13 - finish document updates / update JIRA >>>- July 14 - tag repos and release >>>- Week of July 17 - download page goes live >>> >>> Let me know if you have questions. >>> >>> David >>> >>> -- >>> *David McBride* >>> Release Manager, OPNFV >>> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >>> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >>> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >>> IRC: dmcbride >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] OPNFV Danube 3.0 has been released
TSC members, I'm pleased to let you know that OPNFV Danube 3.0 has been released. Software and documentation may be found here <https://www.opnfv.org/software/downloads>. Congratulations to everyone in the community that worked hard to make this release happen. Please let me know if you have questions or comments. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: [OpenRetriever][Yardstick] Yardstick first kubernetes test case
Xuan, You should start with the infra working group. They meet on Mondays. You may find the logistics here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Infra+Working+Group+Meeting>. David On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:17 AM, 贾玄 <jiax...@chinamobile.com> wrote: > To Jiankun: > > Thanks for your great help. That is a big step for OpenRetriever. > > > > For the POD, what do you mean we do not have the pod to test it currently > ? Does it mean there is no POD available for us ? or there is no POD > satisfy our requirement ? > > > > For E release, I submit our resource requirement in this page. > > https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Project+CI+Resource+Requirements+for+ > Euphrates > > > > Hi, Dave, Do you know how can openretriever team get the resource ? What > need we do ? > > > > Thanks > > > > Xuan Jia > > Project Manager > > Big Data & IT Technology Research Center China Mobile Research Institute > > 32 Xuanwumen West Street, Xicheng Distirct, Beijing 100032, China > > Mobile: (+86) 13811000575 <+86%20138%201100%200575> > > E-mail: jiax...@chinamobile.com > > > > *发件人:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *代表 *chenjiankun > *发送时间:* 2017年7月18日 14:15 > *收件人:* jason.jiax...@gmail.com; ruijing@intel.com; Ross Brattain < > ross.b.bratt...@intel.com>; Gaoliang (kubi) <jean.gaoli...@huawei.com> > *抄送:* test...@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > *主题:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OpenRetriever][Yardstick] Yardstick first > kubernetes test case > > > > Hi All, > > > > After this patch(https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36537/) merged, we > are very glad to have the first test case in yardstick for kubernetes: > ping_k8s. > > With the help of @Ruijing(thanks RuijingJ as well as OpenRetriever team), > now we have a basic kubernetes context, we have the basic ability to use > kubernetes context > > to orchestrate containers(as SUT) and then do test on it. > > > > It should be our first step, I will strengthen kubernetes context step by > step in the future. > > > > But we also have a problem: Ideally this test case should run in CI so > that we can do continuous testing, but unfortunately we do not have the pod > to test it currently. > > Also we need a way to trigger test case and then report the test result to > our database. What’s your opinion? please do not hesitate to comment. > > > > Best Regards, > > Jack Chan > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for this week's Technical Community call
Ray, I'd like to continue the discussion with the SampleVNF team that was started in the spring: - Update on VNF catalog from SampleVNF project - Review which VNFs the project has completed or plans to work on - Discuss VNF projects that would be advantageous to EUAG or ONAP that can be assigned to the 'F' release David On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > All, > > I'm reaching out to solicit topics for this week's Technical Community > call (I'm filling in for Bin while he's on vacation). > > I already have the topic > <https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2017-July/017090.html> > from Bryan, but please let me know if there are others. > > Thanks, > > Ray > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] update to milestone exception request process
Team, After processing our first two exception requests, I found that using email was awkward and messy. It's also hard to keep track of exception requests, since they're buried in email threads. Therefore, I created a wiki template and enabled it via a button that can be used to create a new form, based on the template. Each form that is completed will be listed in a table. This is identical to how the release plan summary is implemented. You may find the wiki page here <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Milestone+Exception+Requests+for+Euphrates>. Feel free to experiment with it. Let me know if you have questions or comments. Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] update to milestone exception request process
Team, Several people have told me that they got an error when they tried to use the form. The problem is that each form has the same title, so the wiki considers them identical and generates an error. I updated the title with "fields," in angle brackets, for the name of the project and the milestones affected. This should produce unique titles, even if the same project submits multiple requests. Don't forget to send me an email after you complete the form. Thanks. David On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:05 AM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > After processing our first two exception requests, I found that using > email was awkward and messy. It's also hard to keep track of exception > requests, since they're buried in email threads. > > Therefore, I created a wiki template and enabled it via a button that can > be used to create a new form, based on the template. Each form that is > completed will be listed in a table. This is identical to how the release > plan summary is implemented. > > You may find the wiki page here > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Milestone+Exception+Requests+for+Euphrates>. > Feel free to experiment with it. Let me know if you have questions or > comments. Thanks. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][documentation][euphrates] Milestone 6 - August 11
Team, As you know, one of the requirements for MS6 is preliminary documentation. At a minimum, the expectation is that you will have the directory structure and placeholder documents in place, based on a template, if available. In order to provide more clarity, I worked with Sofia to create a new form <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Documentation+Compliance+for+Euphrates> for project PTLs to use to ensure that they've met all of the documentation requirements. If you look at the top row of the form <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Documentation+Compliance+for+Euphrates>, you will see that there are separate sections to complete for MS6 (prelim) and MS10 (final). Once you have filled in the boxes for your project, then I will verify your inputs and mark your project compliant for that milestone. Note that there will be an OPNFVDOCS meeting <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/OPNFVDOCS> on Wednesday this week if you have questions about documentation. We will also discuss documentation during part of the release call tomorrow. Let me know if you have questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Milestone 5 / July 28
Reminder... On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:16 PM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > Milestone 5 is just over one week away, on July 28. Here's a summary of > the requirements: > >- Completion of scenario integration for projects that rely on >scenarios for deployment. The scenario deployment must be represented in a >Jenkins job running on OPNFV CI. >- Feature freeze for all projects. This means that all planned >features have been implemented and the code has been committed to your >project repo. From this point forward, all coding should be related to >test case implementation or bug fixing. > > As you know, we implemented a milestone exception process earlier this > year. So, if you are unable to meet the requirements of this milestone, > you will have the option of submitting a milestone exception request, or > withdrawing from the release. If you already know that you will not be > able to meet the requirements, please contact me ASAP and let me know > whether you plan to submit a milestone exception request. > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Milestone 5 / July 28
Team, Tomorrow (Fri, July 28) is MS5. If you are a feature project that depends on a scenario for deployment, *please send me a link to a Jenkins job in OPNFV CI for each scenario* with which you are integrating your feature. For all other projects that are developing code but are NOT dependent on scenario integration for deployment, recall that MS5 marks the end of feature development. All development effort for the remainder of the release should be dedicated to test case implementation or bug fixes. * Please respond to this email and acknowledge that you have completed your feature development.* If you are unable to complete scenario integration, or complete feature development, by Friday, please let me know whether you intend to submit a milestone exception request <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Milestone+Exception+Requests+for+Euphrates>, or withdraw from the release. * If I haven't heard from you by Aug 4, I will assume that you are withdrawing from the release. * Let me know if you have questions. David On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:50 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Reminder... > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:16 PM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Team, >> >> Milestone 5 is just over one week away, on July 28. Here's a summary of >> the requirements: >> >>- Completion of scenario integration for projects that rely on >>scenarios for deployment. The scenario deployment must be represented in >> a >>Jenkins job running on OPNFV CI. >>- Feature freeze for all projects. This means that all planned >>features have been implemented and the code has been committed to your >>project repo. From this point forward, all coding should be related to >>test case implementation or bug fixing. >> >> As you know, we implemented a milestone exception process earlier this >> year. So, if you are unable to meet the requirements of this milestone, >> you will have the option of submitting a milestone exception request, or >> withdrawing from the release. If you already know that you will not be >> able to meet the requirements, please contact me ASAP and let me know >> whether you plan to submit a milestone exception request. >> >> Let me know if you have any questions. >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release] impact of July 14 release date for Danube 3 on Compass team
TSC, I took an action during the TSC meeting on June 27 to follow up with the Compass team on the impact of moving the release date for Danube 3 to July 14. Specifically, there was concern about how this might impact work on the Euphrates release. There are two issues: 1. MS3.2 (integrated SDN scenario deploys and passes health check) occurs on July 11, just 3 days before the proposed July 14 release date for Danube 3. 2. The compass team is operating under a milestone exception for Euphrates. The recovery plan calls for them to be caught up as of MS3.2 on July 11, so their burden for this milestone is greater than it would be, otherwise, without the milestone exception. I had a chance to talk with Justin, the Compass PTL. He indicated that this is not an ideal situation and he will plan to prioritize Euphrates over Danube 3. He said: "Fine with me. But since Danube 3.0 release and Euphrates MS3.2 day are close, so I might have a higher priority in Euphrates" For example, this might result in the new onos-sfc scenario not being released. In my opinion, although the proposed release date presents a challenge for the Compass team, I don't think that it is unreasonable. In addition, if there is a problem, then a remedy may be to reconsider their MS exception plan. Let me know if you have questions or concerns. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [release][announce] RESPONSE REQUIRED / proposed change to release date for Danube 3.0
+Ross On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Tim Irnich <tim.irn...@ericsson.com> wrote: > +1 > > Regards, Tim > > Von meinem iPhone gesendet > > Am 29.06.2017 um 17:05 schrieb Frank Brockners (fbrockne) < > fbroc...@cisco.com>: > > +1 > > Frank > > Am 28.06.2017 um 11:12 schrieb David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > >: > > TSC, > > After examining status and considering various alternatives, Ray and I > have agreed to propose July 14 as the new release date for Danube 3. We > believe that this will give project and installer teams time to overcome > current issues, as well as allowing us to avoid the 4th of July holiday in > the U.S., when many community members will be away on vacation. > > Assuming that the TSC approves this change, then I would suggest the > following schedule: > >- July 12 - complete testing >- July 13 - finish document updates / update JIRA >- July 14 - tag repos and release >- Week of July 17 - download page goes live > > TSC members, *please respond to this email with your vote on the > following by EOD PT June 30*: > > Does the TSC approve moving the Danube 3.0 release date to July 14th? (+1, > 0, -1) > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > > ___ > opnfv-tsc mailing list > opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] intel pod21 accessing issue
Narinder & Ross, What's the status? Is Joid connected to CI? If not, what's the estimate for when it will be connected? Thanks. David On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:59 AM Brattain, Ross B <ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> wrote: > Yes, we just rebooted. > > > > *From:* David McBride [mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org] > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:55 AM > *To:* Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> > *Cc:* Brattain, Ross B <ross.b.bratt...@intel.com>; Narinder Gupta < > narinder.gu...@canonical.com>; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV < > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; Cooper, Trevor < > trevor.coo...@intel.com> > *Subject:* Re: intel pod21 accessing issue > > > > +Trevor, tech-discuss > > > > Team, > > > > There seems to be a systemic issue with Intel PODs, beyond the issue > originally reported by Narinder. See Mark's comments in the thread below. > > > > Ross / Trevor - could you please look into this ASAP? Thanks. > > > > David > > > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > It would appear that not just pod 21 is affected. Pod 24 is in the same > situation where the VPN is failing to pass any traffic. From Jenkins [1] I > can see that nearly every Intel pod is offline. This means no daily jobs > can run. > > > > Ross, is there someone at Intel that should be contacted, or are you the > virtual Jack while he's off? > > > > David, a broadcast to the opnfv-test-discuss list is probably a good idea > so that everyone is aware of this outage. > > > > [1] https://build.opnfv.org/ci/computer/ > > > > Regards, > > Mark > > > > *Mark Beierl* > > SW System Sr Principal Engineer > > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > > *mark.bei...@dell.com <mark.bei...@dell.com>* > > > > On Jun 28, 2017, at 08:40, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> wrote: > > > > It appears to be the same problem for me. Once connected to the VPN, I > cannot route any traffic: > > > > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=943655 /sbin/ip link set dev tun0 up mtu 1500 > > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=946972 /sbin/ip addr add dev tun0 local > 10.10.210.205 peer 10.10.210.206 > > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=953666 /sbin/ip route add 10.10.210.0/24 via > 10.10.210.206 > > > > ping 10.10.210.206 > > PING 10.10.210.206 (10.10.210.206) 56(84) bytes of data. > > --- 10.10.210.206 ping statistics --- > > 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2030ms > > > > ping 10.10.210.1 > > PING 10.10.210.1 (10.10.210.1) 56(84) bytes of data. > > --- 10.10.210.1 ping statistics --- > > 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2029ms > > > > Looks like something is wrong with the VPN server. > > > > Regards, > > Mark > > > > *Mark Beierl* > > SW System Sr Principal Engineer > > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > > *mark.bei...@dell.com <mark.bei...@dell.com>* > > > > On Jun 27, 2017, at 22:41, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > > > +Mark > > > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Narinder Gupta < > narinder.gu...@canonical.com> wrote: > > Ross, > > It was working but suddenly it stopped responding now and this time seems > to be access from vpn as i can not access even IPMI now. > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Narinder Gupta (PMP) narinder.gu...@canonical.com > > Canonical, Ltd.narindergupta [irc.freenode.net] > > +1.281.736.5150 <(281)%20736-5150> > narindergupta2007[skype] > > > > Ubuntu- Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com | www.canonical.com > > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Brattain, Ross B < > ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Narinder, > > > > Was Mark's help sufficient to get you access to jumphost? Is everything > working? > > > > Thanks, > > Ross > > > > *From:* Narinder Gupta [mailto:narinder.gu...@canonical.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:22 AM > *To:* Brattain, Ross B <ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> > *Cc:* David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > *Subject:* intel pod21 accessing issue > > > > Hi Ross I am having issue in accessing the jumphost at Intel pod21. I can > not even ping the IP of the jumphost *10.10.210.20* > > > > I can ping the IPMI
[opnfv-tech-discuss] Status of Functest / Apex
Tim and Jose, Have Functest results improved for Apex scenarios? Any remaining issues with either Apex/Triple O or with the Functest framework that we should be aware of? Thanks. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 <javascript:void(0);> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Status of Functest / Apex
+Dan On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 4:17 PM David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Tim and Jose, > > Have Functest results improved for Apex scenarios? Any remaining issues > with either Apex/Triple O or with the Functest framework that we should be > aware of? Thanks. > > David > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 <javascript:void(0);> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] intel pod21 accessing issue
+Trevor, tech-discuss Team, There seems to be a systemic issue with Intel PODs, beyond the issue originally reported by Narinder. See Mark's comments in the thread below. Ross / Trevor - could you please look into this ASAP? Thanks. David On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> wrote: > Hello, > > It would appear that not just pod 21 is affected. Pod 24 is in the same > situation where the VPN is failing to pass any traffic. From Jenkins [1] I > can see that nearly every Intel pod is offline. This means no daily jobs > can run. > > Ross, is there someone at Intel that should be contacted, or are you the > virtual Jack while he's off? > > David, a broadcast to the opnfv-test-discuss list is probably a good idea > so that everyone is aware of this outage. > > [1] https://build.opnfv.org/ci/computer/ > > Regards, > Mark > > *Mark Beierl* > SW System Sr Principal Engineer > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > mark.bei...@dell.com > > On Jun 28, 2017, at 08:40, Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@emc.com> wrote: > > It appears to be the same problem for me. Once connected to the VPN, I > cannot route any traffic: > > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=943655 /sbin/ip link set dev tun0 up mtu 1500 > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=946972 /sbin/ip addr add dev tun0 local > 10.10.210.205 peer 10.10.210.206 > Wed Jun 28 08:37:13 2017 us=953666 /sbin/ip route add 10.10.210.0/24 via > 10.10.210.206 > > ping 10.10.210.206 > PING 10.10.210.206 (10.10.210.206) 56(84) bytes of data. > --- 10.10.210.206 ping statistics --- > 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2030ms > > ping 10.10.210.1 > PING 10.10.210.1 (10.10.210.1) 56(84) bytes of data. > --- 10.10.210.1 ping statistics --- > 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2029ms > > Looks like something is wrong with the VPN server. > > Regards, > Mark > > *Mark Beierl* > SW System Sr Principal Engineer > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > mark.bei...@dell.com > > On Jun 27, 2017, at 22:41, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > +Mark > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Narinder Gupta < > narinder.gu...@canonical.com> wrote: > >> Ross, >> It was working but suddenly it stopped responding now and this time seems >> to be access from vpn as i can not access even IPMI now. >> >> Thanks and Regards, >> Narinder Gupta (PMP) narinder.gu...@canonical.com >> Canonical, Ltd.narindergupta >> [irc.freenode.net]+1.281.736.5150 <(281)%20736-5150> >>narindergupta2007[skype] >> >> Ubuntu- Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com | www.canonical.com >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Brattain, Ross B < >> ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Narinder, >>> >>> >>> >>> Was Mark's help sufficient to get you access to jumphost? Is everything >>> working? >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ross >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Narinder Gupta [mailto:narinder.gu...@canonical.com] >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:22 AM >>> *To:* Brattain, Ross B <ross.b.bratt...@intel.com> >>> *Cc:* David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> >>> *Subject:* intel pod21 accessing issue >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Ross I am having issue in accessing the jumphost at Intel pod21. I >>> can not even ping the IP of the jumphost *10.10.210.20* >>> >>> >>> >>> I can ping the IPMI *10.10.210.10* >>> >>> Thanks and Regards, >>> >>> Narinder Gupta (PMP) narinder.gu...@canonical.com >>> >>> Canonical, Ltd.narindergupta [irc.freenode.net] >>> >>> +1.281.736.5150 <(281)%20736-5150> >>> narindergupta2007[skype] >>> >>> >>> >>> Ubuntu- Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com | www.canonical.com >>> >>> >> > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube 3 release on July 14
Reminder... as approved by the TSC last week, Danube 3 will be released 1 week from tomorrow on July 14. The schedule is as follows: - July 12 - complete testing - July 13 - finish document updates / update JIRA - July 14 - tag repos and release - Week of July 17 - download page goes live Let me know if you have questions. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] more detailed scheduling for Danube 2.0
Team, I took an action during the TSC call this week to provide more detailed scheduling for the Danube 2.0 release on Thursday, May 4. Here's my proposal: - Tuesday, May 2 - Complete formal testing - Wednesday, May 3 - Complete documentation / JIRA cleanup - Thursday, May 4 - tagging <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube> David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates]Intent-to-Participate - OVN4NFV
Thanks, Vikram. Note that release plans must be completed by Tuesday, May 2. David On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Vikram Dham <vikramd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello David, > > OVN4NFV project intends to participate in the upcoming release. Our work > will mainly focus on enabling OVN in installers, updating documentation and > ensuring relevant test cases are in place. > > Thanks, > > Vikram -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube 2.0 release NEXT WEEK (May 4)
Team, The Danube 2.0 release is next week. Please make sure that the intent-to-release column for Danube 2.0 on the scenario status page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Danube+Scenario+Status> is up to date. Also, please remember that ALL scenarios that were released in Danube 1.0 will also be released in Danube 2.0. If there are problems with your scenario, please make sure that they are resolved in time for the release. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] schedule change for MS1
Gentle reminder... Euphrates MS1 is just over one week away (May 2). David On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:22 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Team, > > As you know, Milestone 1 is the deadline for intent-to-participate, and > for project release plans. On the TSC call this morning, some community > members said that they would like to use the upcoming plugfest to finalized > their release planning for Euphrates. > > Therefore, based on consent of the TSC, MS1 has been moved out 8 days to > May 2, which is the Tuesday following the week of plugfest. No other > milestones are effected. The Euphrates release schedule > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates> has been updated, > accordingly. > > Please let me know if you have questions or comments. > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Milestone 5 / August 11
Team, Per the revised schedule <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates>, approved by the TSC earlier this week, Milestone 5 is in one week, on August 11. Here's a summary of the requirements: - Completion of scenario integration for projects that rely on scenarios for deployment. The scenario deployment must be represented in a Jenkins job running on OPNFV CI. - Feature freeze for all projects. This means that all planned features have been implemented and the code has been committed to your project repo. From this point forward, all coding should be related to test case implementation or bug fixing. As you know, we implemented a milestone exception process <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Milestone+Exception+Requests+for+Euphrates> earlier this year. So, if you are unable to meet the requirements of this milestone, you will have the option of submitting a milestone exception request, or withdrawing from the release. I will be on vacation the next two weeks, so please contact Ray Paik if you have any questions or concerns. -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] Milestone 5 / July 28
Team, So far, I've heard from less than half of the projects about MS5. If you are participating in the Euphrates release, please report your status to me ASAP. See my previous email for details. Thanks. David On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:32 PM, David McBride < dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > Tomorrow (Fri, July 28) is MS5. If you are a feature project that depends > on a scenario for deployment, *please send me a link to a Jenkins job in > OPNFV CI for each scenario* with which you are integrating your feature. > > For all other projects that are developing code but are NOT dependent on > scenario integration for deployment, recall that MS5 marks the end of > feature development. All development effort for the remainder of the > release should be dedicated to test case implementation or bug fixes. * Please > respond to this email and acknowledge that you have completed your feature > development.* > > If you are unable to complete scenario integration, or complete feature > development, by Friday, please let me know whether you intend to submit a > milestone > exception request > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Milestone+Exception+Requests+for+Euphrates>, > or withdraw from the release. * If I haven't heard from you by Aug 4, I > will assume that you are withdrawing from the release. * > > Let me know if you have questions. > > David > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:50 AM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Reminder... >> >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:16 PM, David McBride < >> dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >>> Team, >>> >>> Milestone 5 is just over one week away, on July 28. Here's a summary of >>> the requirements: >>> >>>- Completion of scenario integration for projects that rely on >>>scenarios for deployment. The scenario deployment must be represented >>> in a >>>Jenkins job running on OPNFV CI. >>>- Feature freeze for all projects. This means that all planned >>>features have been implemented and the code has been committed to your >>>project repo. From this point forward, all coding should be related to >>>test case implementation or bug fixing. >>> >>> As you know, we implemented a milestone exception process earlier this >>> year. So, if you are unable to meet the requirements of this milestone, >>> you will have the option of submitting a milestone exception request, or >>> withdrawing from the release. If you already know that you will not be >>> able to meet the requirements, please contact me ASAP and let me know >>> whether you plan to submit a milestone exception request. >>> >>> Let me know if you have any questions. >>> >>> David >>> >>> -- >>> *David McBride* >>> Release Manager, OPNFV >>> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >>> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >>> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >>> IRC: dmcbride >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [armband] Resource for development or testing
+Bob, Alex, Cristina On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:25 AM Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com> wrote: > Hello, team! > > As StorPerf is published as a Docker container, and after looking at > Functest, I realized that StorPerf not run natively on ARM. I need to > create ARM based images, and therefore would like to ask if there is any > pod or resources that have an existing OPNFV installation on them where I > can run StorPerf for validation testing? > > Please let me know if this is something your team can provide. > > Regards, > Mark > > *Mark Beierl* > SW System Sr Principal Engineer > *Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO > mobile +1 613 314 8106 <1-613-314-8106> > mark.bei...@dell.com > > ___ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 <javascript:void(0);> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] MS1 Intent to Participate / Release Planning - TOMORROW (Tues, May 2)
I neglected one item for release planning (new for Euphrates): - Create and publish a release plan - Fill out the summary <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates> - Add your scenarios to the scenario status page <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status> - Specify your CI requirements in the CI Resource Requirements table <http://Create and publish a release plan Fill out the summary Add your scenarios to the scenario status page> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 8:57 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Team, > > Euphrates MS1 is Tuesday, May 2 (5 p.m. Pacific). Please confirm that > your project is on the intent-to-participate > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Projects+Intending+to+Participate+in+the+Euphrates+Release> > list. If your project is not listed and you are planning to > participate, please follow the process > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Project+Inclusion+in+OPNFV+Release> and > send mail to the TSC mailing list immediately. > > In addition, MS1 is also the deadline for release planning: > >1. Create and publish a release plan >2. Fill out the summary > > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates> >3. Add your scenarios to the scenario status page ><https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status> > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] MS1 Intent to Participate / Release Planning - TOMORROW (Tues, May 2)
For some reason the link didn't work: CI Resource Requirements <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Project+CI+Resource+Requirements+for+Euphrates> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 2:35 PM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I neglected one item for release planning (new for Euphrates): > >- Create and publish a release plan >- Fill out the summary > > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates> >- Add your scenarios to the scenario status page ><https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status> >- Specify your CI requirements in the CI Resource Requirements table > > > On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 8:57 AM, David McBride < > dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Team, >> >> Euphrates MS1 is Tuesday, May 2 (5 p.m. Pacific). Please confirm that >> your project is on the intent-to-participate >> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Projects+Intending+to+Participate+in+the+Euphrates+Release> >> list. If your project is not listed and you are planning to >> participate, please follow the process >> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Project+Inclusion+in+OPNFV+Release> and >> send mail to the TSC mailing list immediately. >> >> In addition, MS1 is also the deadline for release planning: >> >>1. Create and publish a release plan >>2. Fill out the summary >> >> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Summary+of+Release+Plans+for+Euphrates> >>3. Add your scenarios to the scenario status page >><https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status> >> >> David >> >> -- >> *David McBride* >> Release Manager, OPNFV >> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 >> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org >> Skype: davidjmcbride1 >> IRC: dmcbride >> > > > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] more detailed scheduling for Danube 2.0
REMINDER.. You should be completing your testing on Tuesday (tomorrow). David On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:06 AM, David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > wrote: > Team, > > I took an action during the TSC call this week to provide more detailed > scheduling for the Danube 2.0 release on Thursday, May 4. > > Here's my proposal: > >- Tuesday, May 2 - Complete formal testing >- Wednesday, May 3 - Complete documentation / JIRA cleanup >- Thursday, May 4 - tagging ><https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Danube> > > David > > -- > *David McBride* > Release Manager, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > IRC: dmcbride > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
[opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][euphrates] status as of Milestone 1
As you know, MS1 was Tuesday, May 2. MS1 has two requirements: 1. All projects that intend to participate in the release must submit an intent-to-participate notification. 2. All participating projects must complete their release planning, including: - Document and publish a release plan - Complete the project summary table - Document scenarios on the scenario status page - Complete the CI requirements table First, the good news: we have 45 projects that have committed to participating in Euphrates. This is a record level of project participation for OPNFV! Second, the not so good news. We have *about 18 projects (40% !) that are out of compliance* with MS1 due to the lack of a release plan. I will be reaching out to these projects to complete this requirement immediately, or submit an exception request. David -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
