Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stable] Moving stable/mitaka to Phase-II and liberty to Phase-III

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 08:42:48AM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > I think it would also make sense to *release* on the boundary of the switch; > so that it’s clear which phase a release followed. I agree, I don't really have a mechanism for do that though. I didn't state this but my plan was

[openstack-dev] [all][stable] Moving stable/mitaka to Phase-II and liberty to Phase-III

Hi All, Now that newton is out I'd like to moves stable/mitaka and stable/liberty into the next support phase. * Phase I: stable/newton ;P * Phase II: stable/mitaka * Phase III: All other stable branches[2] For more details refer to [1]. So as of Friday 14th this will be in effect. That

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Results of the TC Election

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:49:12AM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the TC. > > Doug Hellmann (dhellmann) > Emilien Macchi (emilienm) > Jeremy Stanley (fungi) > Monty Taylor (mordred) > Sean Dague (sdague) > St

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] Results of the TC Election

Please join me in congratulating the 6 newly elected members of the TC. Doug Hellmann (dhellmann) Emilien Macchi (emilienm) Jeremy Stanley (fungi) Monty Taylor (mordred) Sean Dague (sdague) Steve Martinelli (stevemar) Full results:

Re: [openstack-dev] [murano] IRC Meeting time suggestion

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 03:35:14AM +0300, Victor Ryzhenkin wrote: > Hey! > > Omar, time is good! Just please, don’t forget to update our meeting page [1] > with this information :) Also update http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Murano_Meeting with a change in the openstack-infra/irc-meetings repo

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][docs] What is the policy for backporting docs changes to stable branches?

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:37:07AM -0400, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote: > > On Wednesday, 5 October 2016 15:31:50 CEST Pavlo Shchelokovskyy wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> lately I realized that docs for two of the features I was

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Why do we have project specific hacking rules?

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:56:15AM -0500, Ian Cordasco wrote: > So hacking doesn't push out to anyone. It's one of the projects that doesn't > get updated by global-requirements updates, if I remember correctly. Just clarifying/confirming what Ian says. The proposal-bot does not generate

Re: [openstack-dev] FYI - gate completely borked on master and newton dsvm/grenade jobs

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 10:28:33AM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Tony Breeds <t...@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote: > > > > So it seems to me that we can revert: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+NOT+branch:master+project:openstack/requirements+topic:b

Re: [openstack-dev] FYI - gate completely borked on master and newton dsvm/grenade jobs

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 07:19:46PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-10-03 16:11:25 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote: > [...] > > I think we can bring this thread to a close now. Upstream deleted > > the broken wheel from PyPI a little over an hour ago, and within > > about 5 minutes it

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Voting for the TC Election is now open

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:32:54AM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: > NOTE: The election officals have been contacted by a number of people stating > that they have not recieved thier ballot. In addition the email to > openstack-dev announcing the opening of the elction did n

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] Voting for the TC Election is now open

NOTE: The election officals have been contacted by a number of people stating that they have not recieved thier ballot. In addition the email to openstack-dev announcing the opening of the elction did not arrive. As such the election officials are performing the following actions: 1. Extending

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [devstack] nova-api did not start

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:10:52AM +0800, xiangxinyong wrote: > Hi guys, > > > When i setup OpenStack by devstack, > I have got an error message "nova-api did not start". > > > [Call Trace] > ./stack.sh:1242:start_nova_api > /home/edison/devstack/lib/nova:802:die > [ERROR]

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL Election Conclusion and Results

: Haïkel Guémar * Puppet_OpenStack : Alex Schultz * Quality_Assurance : Ken'ichi Ohmichi * Rally : Andrey Kurilin * RefStack : Catherine Diep * Release_Management: Doug Hellmann * Requirements : Tony Breeds

Re: [openstack-dev] [Security] Picking a new tag

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:12:53AM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > It actually is, but Mailman (unhelpfully) lists tags by their long > descriptions. Go ahead and click on the Details link next to the > Cross-project coordination topic and you'll see that's actually the > name for the [all] tag.

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] pypi mirrors out of sync

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 06:32:59PM +1000, Ian Wienand wrote: > So fungi started the process for a manual sync [1]; I had a look at > the screen session he started about 30 minutes later. I was too hasty > and didn't save the screen session from fungi's run, but the sync that > started seemed to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Security] Picking a new tag

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:03:31PM +0100, Dave Walker wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not convinced it needs changing. [security] is a pretty logical topic > tag, and rolls off the keyboard quite easily. > > So the real issue is filtering on headers. Most mail providers do provide > this, and certainly

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][stable/liberty] Backport impasse: "virt: set address space & CPU time limits when running qemu-img"

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:05:51PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > Well, the risk profile of what has to be changed for stable/liberty > (given that all the actual code is buried in libraries which have tons > of other changes). Special cherry-picked library versions would be > needed to fix this

[OpenStack-Infra] pypi mirrors out of sync

Hi All, I know a lot of the infra team are in Germany for the sprint, howveer I'm see what seems like a lot of upper-constraint bumps that are failing due to mirrors being out of sync. The most recent example of this is https://review.openstack.org/374469/ where you can see: --- Could not

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][stable/liberty] Backport impasse: "virt: set address space & CPU time limits when running qemu-img"

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:57:26AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:48:49PM +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > > The said patch in question fixes a CVE[x] in stable/liberty. > > > > We currently have two options, both of them have caused an impasse with > > the Nova

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE][kuryr] kuryr-lib

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:43:41PM +0200, Antoni Segura Puimedon wrote: > Hi, > > We recently made the first release (0.1.0) of kuryr-lib on which no > project depends except openstack/kuryr-libnetwork. Now, kuryr-lib by > itself is not more than a base library and its release is only to > serve

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] Bump swiftclient to 3.1.0

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 08:09:49PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19 2016, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > We do not generally bump minimum versions for dependencies for bug > > fixes, especially for only one project. Does this validation bug affect > > other projects? Is python-swiftclient

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [openstack-dev] Announcing firehose.openstack.org

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:50:31AM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I wanted to announce the addition of a new infra service we started running > recently, the firehose. Running at firehose.openstack.org the firehose is an > MQTT based unified message bus for infra services. The

Re: [openstack-dev] Announcing firehose.openstack.org

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:50:31AM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I wanted to announce the addition of a new infra service we started running > recently, the firehose. Running at firehose.openstack.org the firehose is an > MQTT based unified message bus for infra services. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][astara][cloudkitty][dragonflow][i18n][karbor][openstack_ux][openstacksalt][security][senlin][elections] Last hours for PTL candidate announcements

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 06:12:53PM -0700, Adam Lawson wrote: > Tony, I tried to commit my candidacy for Astara but I am not seeing the > file present. Is there a delay between the commit and the display at > git.openstack.org? Hi Adam, No it's just the standard gerrit review system. Once git

[openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL Voting is now open

Elections are underway and will remain open for you to cast your vote until 2016-09-25, 23:45 UTC. We are having elections for Freezer, Ironic, Keystone, Kolla, Magnum and Quality_Assurance. If you are a Foundation individual member and had a commit in one of the program's projects[0] over the

[openstack-dev] [all][astara][cloudkitty][dragonflow][i18n][karbor][openstack_ux][openstacksalt][security][senlin][elections] Last hours for PTL candidate announcements

A quick reminder that we are in the last hours for PTL candidate announcements. If you want to stand for PTL, don't delay, follow the instructions at [1] to make sure the community knows your intentions. Make sure your candidacy have been submitted to the openstack/election repository and

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE][keystone][release] block keystonemiddleware 4.0.0

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 03:53:46PM -0400, Steve Martinelli wrote: > A bug was recently filed against keystone [1]. As of the Newton release we > depend on a class being public -- BaseAuthProtocol instead of > _BaseAuthProtocol [2]. Which was introduced in 4.1.0 [3]. > > The current requirement

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][oslo][release][requirements][FFE] global-requirements update for requests-kerberos

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 03:23:08PM -0400, Adam Young wrote: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/368530/ > > This change is for Python >2.7 only, as python2.7 already supports the > latest version of these libraraies. Back in the "just get pythoin3 to work" > days we cut our losses on Kerberos

Re: [openstack-dev] [release] proposing adding Tony Breeds to "Release Managers" team

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:00:40AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > After a week with only positive responses, I've added Tony to both the > "Release Managers" and "release-tools-core" groups in gerrit. > > Welcome aboard, Tony! Thanks so much Doug. I'd like to thank you and the rest of the team

Re: [openstack-dev] Election Season, PTL and TC September/October 2016

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 12:10:53PM +, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Lastly, election officials are also reachable through the > #openstack-election Freenode channel. I wonder if it's worth having all conversations in #openstack-dev? There are pros and cons to both. Having a single purpose

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][oslo][release][requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 09:03:52AM +0800, Jamie Lennox wrote: > So the major difference between positional 1.0 and 1.1 is that we swapped > from using a @functools.wrap decorator to a @wrapt decorator. The reason > for this is that @functools.wraps basically screws up any inspection of the >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Release] [FFE] two xstatic packages to be bumped in upper-constraints, please

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:39:24AM +1000, Richard Jones wrote: > Hi folks, > > We have two patches to upper-constraints up that we'd like to see merged > for Newton. The package updates in question only changed meta-data, but > they did so in a way that fixes issues for downstream, and it makes

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] Request to allow ceilometerclient 2.6.1 in upper-constraints for newton

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 03:29:23PM -0400, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > Hi, > > This is FFE request to get ceilometerclient 2.6.1 into upper constraints. > There is already a patch for this blocked by freeze[1]. > > ceilometerclient 2.6.1 was cut 3 days after the freeze looks like and it > includes

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] pymod2pkg 0.5.4

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 12:26:29PM +0200, Dirk Müller wrote: > Hi, > > OpenStack RPM Packaging would like to update to pymod2pkg 0.5.4: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/367388/ > > this package is only used by packaging (renderspec and rpm-packaging > git repos) that are on a

Re: [Openstack] i want to kilo verion /var/www/cgi-bin/keystone/admin

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 05:03:35PM +0800, YOUDI wrote: > I am a new user openstack > I want install kilo version openstack Kilo has been End-of-Lifed (EOLd). I suggest you start with mitaka (as liberty will be EOLd soonish) If you *really* need kilo you'll need to proide a little more

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] block graphviz 0.5.0

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:50:46AM +0100, Dave Walker wrote: > Looking at the Kolla CI log[0], it doesn't look like Kolla is either at > fault, or can adapt to the issue in Graphviz. > > Graphviz released 0.5.0 last night, and it seems to have introduced a > regression. I've raised this as an

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] [all] Regarding string freeze and back ports involving translatable strings

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 11:17:17AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 09/09/2016 04:34 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: > > [...] > > I did a spot check and it seems like liberty is closed for translations. > > Yes, liberty is closed for translations now, Thanks Andreas. Yours

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] block graphviz 0.5.0

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 11:58:29AM +0530, Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap) wrote: > Currently kolla gate jobs are failing due to issues in graphviz 0.5.0. [1] > > We need to unblock the gates by blocking graphviz===0.5.0. It looks to me that the only package directly affected by this FFE is kolla

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:21:57AM -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: > Ya that makes sense, the patch can be altered to just block 4.13.1,2 > (assuming 4.13.3 really does fix it) I feel like we've gotten ourselves (well at least I'm confused) about what we're trying to achieve here. It seem to be the

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] [all] Regarding string freeze and back ports involving translatable strings

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:37:40PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > The former IMO, a high severity bug fix trumps a translation. Note that some > projects are translated on the stable branches too, I know this is the case > for Nova. > > If it's a user-facing change, like an error message in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][oslo][release][requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: > https://review.openstack.org/366631 > > The combination of oslo.context 2.9.0 + positional 1.0.1 (which is the > current minimum requirement) results in various unit test failures in > barbican, related to parsing of request headers

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] Request to allow os-vif 1.2.1 in upper-constraints for newton

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:10:55PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > This is the FFE to get this change in for newton: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/365165/ > > The os-vif 1.2.1 release was a bug fix patch release to get a high priority > bug [1] in for newton that is impacting the neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:29:35PM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > What do we have that uses oslo.db and is itself a library that would > need to be re-released? Package : oslo-db [oslo-db>=4.10.0] (used by 40 projects) Re-Release : 1 projects openstack/neutron-lib

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra][requirements] Odd cases in requirements?

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 07:33:42PM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Reviewing all the constraints work, I see that repositories have created > some workaround around requirements install for one of these two legimit > reasons - most often using tools/tox_install.sh from tox.ini for it: > > 1) The

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] Oslo.db 4.13.1 broke Gnocchi

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 12:29:04PM -0400, Mike Bayer wrote: > is the failure here something that comes up in gnocchi's test suite? > > Could there be some way that oslo libraries run the test suites of all > consuming projects before a patch and/or a release? (apologies if we > already do this).

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] oslosphinx

On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 02:46:11PM +1000, Matthew Oliver wrote: > Thanks Tony, > > Yup that's my understanding too. > > Like you said, thanks to the upper-constraints having the correct version > (4.7.0), and the fact that currently the swiftclient has oslosphinx > unconstrained, means that the

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] oslosphinx

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 05:12:27PM +0200, Ondrej Novy wrote: > Hi, > > https://review.openstack.org/365253 > > released newton version of python-swiftclient 3.1.0 requires newer version > of oslosphinx. Without it, docs can't be built. > > So i prepared fix: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] upcoming freeze (was Re: [release] Release countdown for week R-5, 29 Aug - 2 Sept)

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:48:42PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > Along with this being the Final release for client libraries freeze its also > the requirements freeze. > > That means that on Thursday Sept 1st (UTC) we'll add a procedural -2 to all > open changes in the master bran

[openstack-dev] [requirements] upcoming freeze (was Re: [release] Release countdown for week R-5, 29 Aug - 2 Sept)

Hi all, I'd just like to add a point to Doug's email. Along with this being the Final release for client libraries freeze its also the requirements freeze. That means that on Thursday Sept 1st (UTC) we'll add a procedural -2 to all open changes in the master branch of openstack/requirements.

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] near term gate optimization opportunity

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 08:59:04PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > That seems like a further optimization. Honestly, I would rarely expect > these to be in merge conflict, and at worse, they would be so until the next > requirements push. Cool, we'll try to make it so. Yours Tony. signature.asc

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][elections] Requirements PTL Results

orward, showing their > enthusiasm for the role. It is plain to see this new team has a lot of > leadership available to it as it moves forward. Congratulations Requirements > team. > > Please join me in welcoming your new Requirements PTL, Tony Breeds (tonyb). Thanks to Matthew Thode (promet

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] near term gate optimization opportunity

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 09:13:12AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 2016-08-10 23:06, Sean Dague wrote: > > Based on reading some logs, it looks like requirements updates are > > getting regenerated on every requirements land for all open patches, > > even if they aren't impacted by it - > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] [stable] [all] Changing stable policy for drivers

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:33:52AM +0300, Duncan Thomas wrote: > So I tried to get into helping with the cinder stable tree for a while, and > while I wasn't very successful (lack of time and an inability to convince > my employer it should be a priority), one thing I did notice it that much > of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] [stable] [all] Changing stable policy for drivers

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 09:16:02PM -0700, John Griffith wrote: > Sorry, I wasn't a part of the sessions in Austin on the topic of long > terms support of Cinder drivers. There's a lot going on during the summits > these days. For the record the session in Austin, that I think Matt was

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] [stable] [all] Changing stable policy for drivers

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:39:55AM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > So I guess what I'm asking: If stable branches exist as a place for > package maintainers to collaborate on a common set of backported > fixes, and are not actually usable to that end, why do we continue > to provide them? I don't

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] [stable] [all] Changing stable policy for drivers

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 10:21:19PM -0400, Matthew Treinish wrote: > I fully understood the proposal but I still think you're optimizing for the > wrong thing. We have a community process for doing backports and maintaining > released versions of OpenStack code. The fundamental problem here is

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] History lesson please

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 03:14:43PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > +1 for volunteers to step up. I'll do it and I have a *very* basic prototype done. It wont be in Newton though. Having said that if there is another volenteer I'm happy to work with them or free up time :) Yours Tony. PS:

[openstack-dev] [requirements] History lesson please

Hi all, I guess this is aimed at the long term requirements team members. The current policy for approving requirements[1] bumps contains the following text: Changes to update the minimum version of a library developed by the OpenStack community can be approved by one reviewer, as

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptl][requirements] nomination period started

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:13:03AM -0500, Tony Breeds wrote: > I'd like to nominate for PTL of the, to be formed, requirements project. I'd just like to clarify something as I've been asked by several people privately. The gist of the question is: You're the Stable PTL if elec

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptl][requirements] nomination period started

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:42:32PM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > As part of our discussion, we realized that over time we'll be > automating more and more of the submissions to the requirements > repo so the core review team (and everyone else) will likely end > up submitting fewer manual

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptl][requirements] nomination period started

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:21:26PM -0400, Anita Kuno wrote: > So Doug and I had a chat and we propose the following workflow for > deciding the requirements ptl: > 1) Nominations open, done: > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-July/100173.html > 2) Nominations close:

[openstack-dev] [oslo][nova][requirements] Getting oslo.context 2.6.0 into the gate

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:09:54PM +0200, Markus Zoeller wrote: > Since yesterday, Nova uses "oslo.context" 2.6.0 [1] but the needed > change [2] is not yet in place, which broke "gate-nova-python27-db"[3]. > Logstash counts 70 hits/h [4]. Most folks will be at the midcycle in > Portland and won't

Re: [openstack-dev] [constraints] Updating stable branch URL

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 03:02:45PM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Yes, I think updating that branching script is the best course. > > We might want to modify the tox.ini to make it easier to edit with > sed by defining a variable for the branch. It would be nice if we > could just read the value

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] SFC stable/mitaka version

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:23:30PM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > I only suggest Armando is not dragged into it, the release liaison > (currently me) should be able to handle the request if it comes from the > core team for the subproject. Good point. I defaulted to PTL but you're right the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] SFC stable/mitaka version

On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 12:40:48PM +, Gary Kotton wrote: > Hi, > Is anyone looking at creating a stable/mitaka version? What if someone want > to use this for stable/mitaka? If that's a thing you need it's a matter of Armando asking the release managers to create it. Yours Tony.

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat][requirements] Re: [Openstack-stable-maint] Stable check of openstack/heat failed

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:20:38PM +0800, Ethan Lynn wrote: > Hi Tony, > I submit a patch to use upper-constraints for review, > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/347639/ > . Let’s wait for the feedback > and results. Thanks. I see that you have

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptl][requirements] nomination period started

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 08:41:17AM -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: > We've started a period of self nomination in preparation for the > requirements project fully moving into project (as it's still under Doug > Hellmann). > > We are gathering the self nominations here before we vote next week. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ptl][requirements] nomination period started

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:07:20AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > For the record, Anita has agreed to be the primary election official, > and I will assist her. Thanks Doug and Anita! Yours Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[openstack-dev] [heat][requirements] Re: [Openstack-stable-maint] Stable check of openstack/heat failed

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 05:44:06AM +, A mailing list for the OpenStack Stable Branch test reports. wrote: > Build failed. > > - periodic-heat-docs-liberty > http://logs.openstack.org/periodic-stable/periodic-heat-docs-liberty/6835807/ > : SUCCESS in 10m 19s > -

Re: [openstack-dev] [release] Independent tag and stable branches

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 03:51:19PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > Hi release team, > > So I'm about to release Gnocchi 2.2.0. I'd expect to have a stable/2.2 > branch. Is this going to happen? Based on the format of the YAML file, > I'm not sure this scenario is handled. Note, I'm clearly note a

[OpenStack-Infra] eavesdrop.o.o site not updating.

Hi All, It was pointed out that eavesdrop.o.o isn't updating. It looks to be a permissions problem after switching to the new zuul 2.5 For instance the last publish job's logs are at [1] and towards the end of [2] we see: --- 2016-06-30 01:28:06,461 p=24849 u=zuul | fatal: [node ->

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Apply for release:managed tag

On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 12:56:09AM +, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Hey folks, > > I'd like the release management team to take on releases of Kolla. This > means applying for the release:managed[1] tag. Please vote +1 if you wish to > proceed, or -1 if you don't wish to proceed. The most

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 02:16:55AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Regarding git describe, it shows that : > kilo-2-1146-g8834ac4 Interesting I can't find that SHA in my clone. > while git branch shows: > stable/liberty Okay that's fine. > So what is that mix ? :) Nothing to worry about.

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 02:08:35AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Openbaton.com Okay based on thise tweet I think mitaka is fine. https://twitter.com/OpenBaton/status/741304586674274304 Yours Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Mailing

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 02:08:04AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Not fo other purpose , it was devstack kilo. And now I need devstack > liberty. Oh in that case you're probably okay with just running unstack.sh and clean.sh. Yours Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:16:58AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Thanks for your reply. > > I tried to install liberty but I got this error during stacking. > > could not find user admin (http 401) Please provide some of the log (probably in /opt/stack/log/stack.sh.log or similar) Also can you

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 01:37:09AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > I know clean.sh :) i mean what else should I do ? > > I am installing it directly on machine no VMs. Ah :( After you've run clean you can remove the whole /opt/stack directory Also look at /usr/local for tools and python packages

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:35:49AM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Thanks Tony for reply. > > I ill use liberty , i can not use master because I am using Orchestrator > and I am not sure if it works with Mitaka or Master or not. Can you provide a link to this "Orchestrator" ? Yours Tony.

Re: [Openstack] [openstack] devstack kilo setup

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 03:09:52PM +0200, Ahmed Medhat wrote: > Hi all, > > I am installing devstack kilo. > > while stacking, found that error : error: pathspec 'stable/kilo' did not > match any file(s) known to git. Kilo is no longer available it began it's path to EOL in May. You can use

Re: [openstack-dev] [constraints] Updating stable branch URL

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:28:47PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > I want to say there was a reason we were branching the requirements > repo last, but now I can't remember what it is (or if we even did > branch it last). Thierry or Doug likely recall but are indisposed > this week so I suggest

Re: [openstack-dev] [constraints] Updating stable branch URL

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 05:14:23PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-06-27 15:27:47 +1000 (+1000), Tony Breeds wrote: > [...] > > Can't we extend the tools[1] that do that step with the updating > > of tox.ini? > > The risk there is that you're breakin

Re: [openstack-dev] [constraints] Updating stable branch URL

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 03:08:18PM +1000, Sachi King wrote: > To facilitate upper-constraints on developer systems we have a > hard-coded URL in projects tox.ini. This URL needs to change when > after the openstack/requirements repo has created a branch for the > stable release. > > This is in

Re: [openstack-dev] [grenade] upgrades vs rootwrap

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 02:02:35AM +, Angus Lees wrote: > *** > What are we trying to impose on ourselves for upgrades for the present and > near future (ie: while rootwrap is still a thing)? > *** > > A. Sean says above that we do "offline" upgrades, by which I _think_ he > means a

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Tagging kilo-eol for "the world"

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 04:36:03PM -0700, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: > Hi Tony, Thanks for your response, and no worries! We can live with > the kilo-eol tag, no need to try to delete it. And as you suggested, > we can add a second eol tag when we actually EoL this branch. > > As regards reviving the

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Tagging kilo-eol for "the world"

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:20:12AM -0700, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: > Hi, I had earlier requested in this thread that the stable/kilo branch > for the following repos be not deleted: > > > openstack/group-based-policy > > openstack/group-based-policy-automation > > openstack/group-based-policy-ui >

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][packaging] Normalizing requirements file

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 08:44:25AM +0200, Haïkel wrote: > Roger. Who's Roger? > Maybe we can put it at the agenda to the next (or later) meeting to > work on specifications > and define the next steps before moving on. Yup sounds like a good plan. LIke I said it's a pause not a complete

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][monasca][requirements] Kafka 1.x for Oslo.Messaging and Monasca

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 05:34:27AM +, Keen, Joe wrote: > Davanum, > We started work on getting Monasca into the global requirements with two > reviews [1] [2] that add gate jobs and check requirements jobs for the > Monasca repositories. Some repositories are being adapted to use versions >

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] [stable/mitaka] Error: Discovering versions from the identity service failed when creating the password plugin....

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:27:28AM +0530, mohammad shahid wrote: > Hi, > > I am getting below error while starting openstack devstack with > stable/mitaka release. can someone look at this problem ? so I *think* you're trying to deploy stable/mitaka with the master version of devstack. Please

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][packaging] Normalizing requirements file

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 03:23:43PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 06:45:31AM +0200, Haïkel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > as a packager, I spend a lot of time to scrutinize the requirements > > repo, and I find it easier to read if specifiers are ordere

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Status of the OpenStack port to Python 3

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:08:22AM +0200, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > Le 23/06/2016 02:42, Tony Breeds a écrit : > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:13:21PM +0200, Victor Stinner wrote: > > > Le 22/06/2016 à 10:49, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > > > > Do you think

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Status of the OpenStack port to Python 3

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:13:21PM +0200, Victor Stinner wrote: > Le 22/06/2016 à 10:49, Thomas Goirand a écrit : > > Do you think it looks like possible to have Nova ported to Py3 during > > the Newton cycle? > > It doesn't depend on me: I'm sending patches, and then I have to wait for >

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][packaging] Normalizing requirements file

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 06:45:31AM +0200, Haïkel wrote: > Hi, > > as a packager, I spend a lot of time to scrutinize the requirements > repo, and I find it easier to read if specifiers are ordered. > So in a quick glance, you can check which is the min version required > and max one without

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Stable/liberty functional tests

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:25:14PM +, Bunting, Niall wrote: > Hi, > > > There was work on a patch [1] to fix the liberty stable branch. However, we > are running into problems with the functional tests, because the functional > tests were set up differently in liberty eg. The current [2]

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra] publish-to-pypi not working in Tricircle stable/mitaka branch

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:15:13AM +, joehuang wrote: > Hello, > > The publish-to-pypi job is configured for Tricircle[1], and already gave > "openstackci" the role to "Owner"[3][2]. > > After push a new tag v2.0.1 in stable/mitaka branch of : > https://github.com/openstack/tricircle, the

[openstack-dev] [DIB] Adding GPT support

Hi All, I'd like to add GPT partitioning supporg to DIB. My current understanding is that the only partitioning in DIB currently is provided by partitioning-sfdisk, which will not support GPT. My proposed solution is: 1. Create a new element called partitioning-parted that (surprise

Re: [OpenStack-Infra] [stable] Tag and EOL kilo branches.

On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 05:15:06PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > Hello gerrit/git admins :) > > When you have time can you please abandon the changes at: > http://tiny.cc/os-kilo-still-open > > And tag kilo-eol tag and deleet the stable/kilo branches from the repos > list

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Initial oslo.privsep conversion?

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 08:24:34AM +1000, Michael Still wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Tony Breeds <t...@bakeyournoodle.com> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 08:10:47PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > > > Agreed, but it's the worked

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable][all] Tagging kilo-eol for "the world"

On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 02:16:10AM -0700, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: > Hi Tony, The following repos should not be included in the EoL list since > they will not be EoL'ed at this time: > openstack/group-based-policy > openstack/group-based-policy-automation > openstack/group-based-policy-ui >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Initial oslo.privsep conversion?

On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 08:10:47PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > Agreed, but it's the worked example part that we don't have yet, > chicken/egg. So we can drop the hammer on all new things until someone does > it, which sucks, or hope that someone volunteers to work the first example. I'll work

[OpenStack-Infra] [stable] Tag and EOL kilo branches.

Hello gerrit/git admins :) When you have time can you please abandon the changes at: http://tiny.cc/os-kilo-still-open And tag kilo-eol tag and deleet the stable/kilo branches from the repos listsed in the attached yaml file. Yours Tony. --- - openstack-dev/devstack - openstack-dev/grenade

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >