Hi Joshua,
Thank you very much for you feedback!
This is really a great question, and it was the first question we've asked
ourselves when we started thinking about this new design.
We've considered both options: to have our own syntax (python-like,
java-like, something-else-like) or to use YAML.
Sukhdev, that's awesome, I think it'll be great to make folks able to start
from something easy configurable like gerrit trigger plugin.
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Sukhdev Kapur
sukh...@aristanetworks.comwrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On
Just to add my 2 cents.
1. YAML is already familiar to OpenStack developers as Heat and others use
it. So at least the syntax (not to mess with semantics) doesn't have to be
learned.
2. YAML parser is very flexible an can be extended with additional types or
constructs like Key: filename.yaml to
I remember seeing the same while attaching -- return value is 'detached'.
So I can confirm this is a bug.
I couldn't locate a bug report for it, so I created one:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1280572
Please mark it as a dup if you already have a bug report.
Regards,
Rushi Agrawal
Ph:
Dear Vish,
I completely agree with you. Its like a trade off between getting
re-authenticated (when in a hierarchy user has different roles at different
levels) or parsing the entire hierarchy till the leaf and include all the roles
the user has at each level in the scope.
I am ok with any
Over the last two months, I have submitted few patches which increases
support of block storage volumes in OpenStack's EC2 API. The blueprints for
them have been approved, and the code is ready for review.
* Expose volume type
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/61041/
* Expose volume tags
- Original Message -
From: Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Cc: openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 11:12:12 PM
Subject: Re:
On Sat, Feb 15, at 4:41 am, Akhil Sadashiv Hingane wrote:
When I try to run the test cases for ceilometer, it fails with
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/local/bin/tox, line 9,
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Henry Gessau ges...@cisco.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, at 4:41 am, Akhil Sadashiv Hingane wrote:
When I try to run the test cases for ceilometer, it fails with
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 15 February 2014 08:42, Dan Prince dpri...@redhat.com wrote:
Option B is we make our job easy by strong arming everyone into the same
defaults of our upstream choosing.
Does Nova strong arm everyone into
Very quick note it turns out our mailing lists archives where private I
have no marked them as public. If the links didn't work for you in the
last 24 hrs try again.
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Aryeh Friedman aryeh.fried...@gmail.comwrote:
We apologize for the unclearness of our
Stephen,
Aah, Ok. FWIW, splitting up the VIP into instance/floating IP entity
Right now I'm not sure what would be the best. Currently we don't have
implementation that allows creating VIP on external network directly. For
example, when haproxy VIP is created, it has address on the tenant
Hi
Assuming I am interpreting your mail correctly, I think option A makes
vastly more sense, with one very specific provision I'd add. More on that
in a moment.
Option B, the idea that we would mangle a package-installed environment to
suit our desired layout, is not going to work out well for
Excerpts from Dan Prince's message of 2014-02-15 06:05:30 -0800:
- Original Message -
From: Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Cc: openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org
Excerpts from James Slagle's message of 2014-02-15 13:02:36 -0800:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 15 February 2014 08:42, Dan Prince dpri...@redhat.com wrote:
Option B is we make our job easy by strong arming everyone into the same
Excerpts from Alexander Tivelkov's message of 2014-02-14 18:17:10 -0800:
Hi folks,
Murano matures, and we are getting more and more feedback from our early
adopters. The overall reception is very positive, but at the same time
there are some complaints as well. By now the most significant
Hi all,
Issue #1: Jobs that need more than one hour
Of the last 30 Trove-Gatehttps://rdjenkins.dyndns.org/job/Trove-Gate/ builds
(spanning three days), 7 have failed due to a Jenkins job-level timeout (not a
proboscis timeout). These jobs had no failed tests when the timeout occurred.
Not
Harshad,
Thanks, What happens when I create two VPC ? Beside the project private
networks, what is isolated ?
What do you call DC admin ? I know two administrators :
- Cloud administrators
- VPC admnistrator
Are you saying that VPCs cannot have their own external gateways and NAT pools
Great!
Looks like we have a bunch of people interested in this. Given the Neutron
deadline for I-3, I'll wait and try to setup in IRC for next week. From there,
if there's enough interest, we can try to get a session to discuss at the
Summit.
I'd love to hear the ideas and thoughts on this
Hi Nachi and other cores!
I'm very close to publishing my vendor based VPNaaS driver (service driver is
ready, device driver is a day or two out), but have a bit of an issue. This
code uses the Service Type Framework, which, as you know, is still out for
review (and has been idle for a long
Have the folks creating our puppet modules and install recommendations
taken a close look at all the options and determined
that the defaults are appropriate for deploying RHEL OSP in the
configurations we are recommending?
If by our puppet modules you mean the ones in stackforge, in the vast
Hey,
I have one question related with OpenStack vmwareapi.VMwareVCDriver
resize/cold migration.
The following is my configuration:
DC
|
|Cluster1
| |
| |9.111.249.56
|
|Cluster2
|
|9.111.249.49
*Scenario
On Sat, 2014-02-15 at 17:20 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 15 February 2014 14:34, Fox, Kevin M kevin@pnnl.gov wrote:
I think a lot of projects don't bother to gate, because its far to much
work to set up a workable system.
I can think of several projects I've worked on that would
Comments Inline
Regards
-Harshad
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Martin, JC jch.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
Harshad,
Thanks, What happens when I create two VPC ? Beside the project private
networks, what is isolated ?
Since VPC is mapped to project. All the isolation provided by the project
Hello, Mathew.
I'm seeing same issues with the gate.
I also tried to found out why gate job is failing. First ran into issue related
to cinder installation failure in devstack. But then I found same problem as
you described. The best option is to increase job time range.
Thanks for such
True. The domain hierarchy isn't useful to capture resource sharing across a
VPC. For instance, if a VPC admin would like to scope certain networks or
images to a projects managed within a VPC, there isn't an abstraction today.
Subbu
On Feb 14, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Martin, JC
Harshad,
Curious to know if there is a broad interest in an AWS compatible API in the
community? To clarify, a clear incremental path from an AWS compatible API to
an OpenStack model is not clear.
Subbu
On Feb 15, 2014, at 10:04 PM, Harshad Nakil hna...@contrailsystems.com wrote:
I agree
27 matches
Mail list logo
