OK, let's try to summarize this long thread. there are two sides, the
long-term plan and the short-term plan.
For the long-term plan, there seems to be agreement on:
* a set of project-oriented client tools (nova, glance...) that
allow xe-like commands (nova vm-create)
* a superset tool that
Hello everyone,
As you probably know we need to release a Nova 2011.1.1 version due to
missing elements in the 2011.1 tarball. We also targeted a few
high-impact low-regression-risk fixes, see:
https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/2011.1.1
We now have a 2011.1.1 release candidate tarball
On Feb 24, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Eric Day wrote:
I agree with Vish, I think the correct approach is 3. I have some
ideas on terminology and how to think about this. A scheduler
should not be it's own top-level service. It should instead be a
plugin point (more like auth or db). It would plug into
:)
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
All done, and waiting to be almost immediately out of date. :)
Cheers,
jay
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Andy Smith andys...@gmail.com wrote:
Please summarize these on the wiki and add your information the wiki,
There can be reconfiguration of the network, just not adding/removing of
vifs. The addition of a new vif would generally only be done if an
additional nic or bridge was added to the host. I figure this to be a rare
occurrence. You can add or remove IPs to/from an instance by configuring
aliases on
+1 for long term plan discussion at the summit
+1 for having this in the diablo release
+1 for short term goal: tool being under our control via fork I don't think
JKM will keep up (nothing against JKM, it's just a lot of work).
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 3:20 AM, Thierry Carrez
Hey all,
The backlog on code reviews continues to mount:
https://code.launchpad.net/nova/+activereviews
One thing that would REALLY help reviewers is the following:
If you receive one or more reviews that have asked for fixes to your
branch (Needs Fixing), and you agree to these fixes, please
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
jus...@fathomdb.com wrote:
Good call Jay - I'll do my best to remember to do this!
Why are branches with unmerged pre-reqs showing up in that list? If
reviewers are working from that list, that just seems to be creating extra
work, which
Is there at least a way for not showing branches which are not proposed for
merge into lp:nova?
Salvatore
-Original Message-
From: openstack-bounces+salvatore.orlando=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+salvatore.orlando=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net]
On
I realized my previous mail was a bit unclear...
I meant to say can we avoid showing branches which are proposed to merge into
something different than lp:nova?
-Original Message-
From: openstack-bounces+salvatore.orlando=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Salvatore Orlando
salvatore.orla...@eu.citrix.com wrote:
Is there at least a way for not showing branches which are not proposed for
merge into lp:nova?
Another excellent question. And unfortunately, no, there isn't :(
I'll file it as a wishlist bug on
Hello!
Grid Dynamics is proud to announce public availability of OpenStack Nova RHEL
6.0 build.
At the moment we have RPMs for Bexar release.
It was tested using KVM hypervisor on real hardware in multi-node mode.
Here are instructions to install run our build:
I have filed a bug with Launchpad that asks for enhancements for both
of your issues:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/725163
Cheers!
jay
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Salvatore Orlando
Good work folks!
Do we understand what the dependencies/deltas are to support RHEL5 series
releases? Has anybody done this?
John
-Original Message-
From: openstack-bounces+john=openstack@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+john=openstack@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf
Hi Ed,
So it sounds like we're all talking about the same thing, we just need
to start a Nova glossary so we're all on the smae page of what terms
mean. :) So it sounds like from my last email, kernel == scheduler,
and scheduler == best match.
I'm not too concerned about naming of things as
Our developers here at USC-ISI have been working the SUSE 11.1 side for our GPU
and UltraViolet machines. There are some dependencies I'll try to get our
internal wiki pages pushed out so we can compare notes. I suspect the
kernel/kvm and other tools are of the same enterprise vintage as
Great work!
Vishy and termie got jenkins launching ubuntu+kvm and running smoke tests.
There are a few isssues left but I'm excited to increase coverage.
We'd like to add coverage for rhel 5/6 and suse.
http://ansolabs.no-ip.org:9000/
We'll write an email about how it works so others can run
I'm assuming we're adding this to the openstack.org Hudson setup?
-jay
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Jesse Andrews anotherje...@gmail.com wrote:
Great work!
Vishy and termie got jenkins launching ubuntu+kvm and running smoke tests.
There are a few isssues left but I'm excited to increase
Hi all, especially Salvatore and Armando,
The Launchpad team responded to my feature request. You can see active
reviews for a specific branch using the following:
https://code.launchpad.net/BRANCH/+activereviews
Therefore, to see only the active reviews for the Nova trunk, you can use this:
Possibly a feature request and possibly just a launchpad help request, is
there a way to sort my open merge proposals by most recent activity?
Last modified seems to only apply to changes pushed to the branch, not
comments made on the merge prop.
--andy
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Jay
Looks like anne's doc branch added a dir called test to trunk with a whole
bunch of stuff in it. Was this added on purpose?
Vish
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
Another good feature suggestion. I don't think there is a way in the
current screen to sort. :(
Feel free to add a bug to the Launchpad project. I don't want them to
get sick of me adding feature requests! ;)
-jay
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Andy Smith andys...@gmail.com wrote:
Possibly a
Tracking mac addresses is going to have to change for multi-nic. Instances
are going to have more than one mac address. It's been proposed that we
don't need to track the mac address(es) but I think it's necessary in order
to determine whether a mac is unique or not. Mac addresses don't need to be
We (Citrix) are installing it on CentOS 5.5 at the moment, so it is possible.
(I won't bore you with the train of thought that lead to that act of masochism.)
The main problem is that you need to have parallel Python 2.4 and 2.6
installations, because yum breaks if you try to make 2.6 the
24 matches
Mail list logo
