Hey,
I agree with Dmitry that this spec has a huge scope. If you resubmitted one
with only the power interface, that could be considered for an exception.
A few specific reasons:
1) Auto-enrollment -- should probably be held off at the moment
- This is something that was talked about
I want to nominate Ian Wienand (IRC: ianw) to the DevStack core team. Ian
has been a consistent contributor and reviewer for some time now. He also
manages the Red Hat CI that runs tests on Fedora, RHEL and CentOS so those
platforms have been a particular point of interest for him. Ian has also
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
wrote:
Hi everyone,
With the incredible growth of OpenStack, our development community is
facing complex challenges. How we handle those might determine the
ultimate success or failure of OpenStack.
With this cycle we hit
Multidisciplinary training rules! As an architect with field experience
building roads, sidewalks, roofs, city planning (and training in lean
manufacturing and services) I think I can have a say ;)
You're not really introducing a successful Kanban here, you're just
clarifying that there
Hey sahara folks,
I'm going to push 2014.1.2 tag to stable/icehouse branch next week,
so, please, propose backports before the weekend and ping us to
backport some sensitive fixes.
Thanks you!
--
Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
Sahara Technical Lead
(OpenStack Data Processing)
Principal
Thanks everyone who have joined Sahara meeting.
Here are the logs from the meeting:
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/sahara/2014/sahara.2014-08-07-18.02.html
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/sahara/2014/sahara.2014-08-07-18.02.log.html
--
Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
Sahara
On 08/07/2014 12:32 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
If we try to limit the number of WIP slots, then surely aspiring
contributors will simply work around that restriction by preparing
the code they're interested in on their own private branches, or
in their github forks?
OK, some pragmatic
Hello, oslo cores.
I've finished polishing up oslo.concurrency repo at [0] - please take a
look at it. I used my new version of graduate.sh [1] to generate it, so
history looks a bit different from what you might be used to.
I've made as little changes as possible, so there're still some steps
On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell kevin.mitch...@rackspace.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 17:27 +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
On 07/08/14 16:27, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 12:15 +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
A (the?) solution is to register_opts() in foo
I mean't 'side stepping' why GBP allows for the comment you made previous,
With the latter, a mapping driver could determine that communication
between these two hosts can be prevented by using an ACL on a router or a
switch, which doesn't violate the user's intent and buys a performance
It's just my own preference. Others like webex/hangouts because it can
be easier to talk about topics than in IRC, but with this many people
and the latency delays, it can become quite cumbersome. Plus, it makes
it easier for meeting notes. I'll deal with it while the majority
really prefer it.
On Aug 6, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
We seem to be unable to address some key issues in the software we
produce, and part of it is due to strategic contributors (and core
reviewers)
On 08/07/2014 02:09 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
I want to nominate Ian Wienand (IRC: ianw) to the DevStack core team.
Ian has been a consistent contributor and reviewer for some time now.
He also manages the Red Hat CI that runs tests on Fedora, RHEL and
CentOS so those platforms have been a
On Thu 07 Aug 2014 12:12:26 PM PDT, Brandon Logan wrote:
It's just my own preference. Others like webex/hangouts because it can
be easier to talk about topics than in IRC, but with this many people
and the latency delays, it can become quite cumbersome. Plus, it makes
it easier for meeting
Those are definitely other big reasons, and probably the reason it is
planned to move to IRC in the future, no matter what. I was just
wondering how soon, if soon at all.
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 12:35 -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Thu 07 Aug 2014 12:12:26 PM PDT, Brandon Logan wrote:
It's
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, oslo cores.
I've finished polishing up oslo.concurrency repo at [0] - please take a
look at it. I used my new version of graduate.sh [1] to generate it, so
history looks a bit different from what you might be
Personally, I prefer IRC for general meeting stuff, with separate
breakouts to voice for topics that warrant it.
Doug
On 8/7/14, 2:28 AM, Stephen Balukoff sbaluk...@bluebox.net wrote:
Hi Brandon,
I don't think we've set a specific date to make the transition to IRC
meetings. Is there a
Hi,
Following a very interesting and vocal thread on GBP for last couple of
days and the GBP meeting today, GBP sub-team proposes following name
changes to the resource.
policy-point for endpoint
policy-group for endpointgroup (epg)
Please reply if you feel that it is not ok with reason and
If we try to limit the number of WIP slots, then surely aspiring
contributors will simply work around that restriction by preparing
the code they're interested in on their own private branches, or
in their github forks?
OK, some pragmatic contributors will adjust their priorities to
Can you include the definition/description of what each is here as well? I
think there was a description in the 100+ thread of doom, but I don't want
to go back there :)
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Ronak Shah ronak.malav.s...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
Following a very interesting and vocal
I am sorry that I could not attend the GBP meeting.
Is there any reason why the IEFT standard is not considered?
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3198
I would like to understand the argument why we are creating new names instead
of using the standard ones.
Edgar
From: Ronak Shah
hi Sahara folks,
This serves as a detailed status update for the Swift trust authentication
spec[1], and to bring up concerns about integration for the Juno cycle.
So far I have pushed a few reviews that start to lay the groundwork for the
infrastructure needed to complete this blueprint. I
LGTM. Plenty of things I could add to your list, but they're all
post-import. :-)
-Ben
On 08/07/2014 01:58 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
Hello, oslo cores.
I've finished polishing up oslo.concurrency repo at [0] - please take a
look at it. I used my new version of graduate.sh [1] to generate
Hi Carol, thanks for the summary presentation. I listened in to the board
meeting for this portion. More below.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Barrett, Carol L carol.l.barr...@intel.com
wrote:
I want to provide the community an update on the Win The Enterprise work
group that came together
Edgar-
I can't speak for anyone else, but in my mind at least (and having been
involved in the work that led up to 3198),
the members of the groups being discussed here are not PEPs. As 3198
states, being a PEP implies running COPS
and I don't see that as necessary for membership in GBP groups.
Ryan, point well taken. I am paraphrasing the discussion from today's
GBP sub team meeting on the options considered and the eventual
proposal for policy-point and policy-group:
18:36:50 SumitNaiksatam_ so regarding the endpoint terminology
18:36:53 SumitNaiksatam_ any suggestions?
18:36:56
Ryan,
COPS implies a common protocol to communicate with PEPs, which implies the same
communication mechanism basically.
So, you are implying that endpoints in GBP will use different protocol to
communicate with decisions entities?
It that is the case.. Well it sounds very complex for a simple
Thanks for sharing this Sumit.
Again, my apologies for not attending the meeting, I just I couldn’t.
It seems you had a good discussion about the naming and I do respect the
decision.
Cheers,
Edgar
On 8/7/14, 2:32 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan, point well taken. I
Edgar Magana edgar.mag...@workday.com wrote on 08/07/2014 04:37:39 PM:
From: Edgar Magana edgar.mag...@workday.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 08/07/2014 04:40 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy]
That I understand it!
Thanks for the clarification.
Edgar
From: Ryan Moats rmo...@us.ibm.commailto:rmo...@us.ibm.com
Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Thursday, August 7, 2014 at
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean't 'side stepping' why GBP allows for the comment you made
previous, With the latter, a mapping driver could determine that
communication between these two hosts can be prevented by using an ACL on a
router or a
Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote on 08/07/2014 06:23:56 AM:
From: Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 08/07/2014 06:25 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy
and the way forward
Armando M. wrote:
This
Dear All,
Let me use my first post to this list to introduce Cyclops and initiate a
discussion towards possibility of this platform as a future incubated
project in OpenStack.
We at Zurich university of Applied Sciences have a python project in open
source (Apache 2 Licensing) that
On 08/07/2014 01:41 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
My point was simply that we don't have direct control over the
contributors' activities
This is not correct and I've seen it repeated too often to let it go
uncorrected: we (the OpenStack project as a whole) have a lot of control
over contributors to
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell
kevin.mitch...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 17:46 +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
In any case, the operative point is that CONF.attribute must
always be
evaluated inside run-time code, never at module load time.
...unless
On 08/07/2014 01:41 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
My point was simply that we don't have direct control over the
contributors' activities
This is not correct and I've seen it repeated too often to let it go
uncorrected: we (the OpenStack project as a whole) have a lot of control
over
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
wrote:
On 08/06/2014 05:41 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 06/08/14 18:12, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
Well, as per Git author, that's how you should do with not-CVS. You have
cheap merges - use them instead of erasing parts of
Hi all,
At the recent Ironic mid-cycle meetup, we got the first version of the
ironic-python-agent (IPA) driver merged. There are a few reviews we need merged
(and their dependencies) across a few other projects in order to begin testing
it automatically. We would like to eventually gate IPA
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Ben Nemec openst...@nemebean.com wrote:
On 08/06/2014 05:35 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Ben Nemec openst...@nemebean.com
wrote:
You keep mentioning detached HEAD and reflog. I have never had to deal
with either when doing a
On 07/08/14 13:22, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
Hi all,
I have a ResourceGroup which wraps a custom resource defined in another
template:
servers:
type: OS::Heat::ResourceGroup
properties:
count: 10
resource_def:
type: my_custom_server
On 08/07/2014 04:52 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
I hope you don't think that this thread was about rebases vs merges.
It's about keeping track of your changes without impact on review process.
But if you rebase, what is stopping you from keeping whatever private
history you want and then rebase
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com
wrote:
On 08/07/2014 04:52 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
I hope you don't think that this thread was about rebases vs merges.
It's about keeping track of your changes without impact on review process.
But if you rebase,
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/07/2014 09:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote: I think the difference is
slot selection would just be Nova drivers. I
think there is an assumption in the old system that everyone in Nova
core wants to prioritize the
It seems to me that the tension here is that there are groups who
would really like to use features in newer libvirts that we don't CI
on in the gate. Is it naive to think that a possible solution here is
to do the following:
- revert the libvirt version_cap flag
- instead implement a third
Hi, all
if I have more than one ironic conductor, so does each conductor should has
their own PXE server and DHCP namespace or they just share one centralized
pxe server or dhcp server ? if they share one centralized pxe and dhcp
server, so how does they support HA?
Getting a massive amount of information from data storage to be displayed is
where most of the activity happens in OpenStack. The two activities of reading
data and writing (creating, updating and deleting) data are fundamentally
different.
The optimization for these two opposite database
Did this ever go anywhere?
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-January/024315.html
Looking at what is needed to get backup working in OpenStack, and this
seems the most recent reference.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 03:56:04AM -0700, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/07/2014 02:12 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
[. . .]
Excellent sugestion. I've wondered multiple times that if we could
dedicate a good chunk (or whole) of a specific release for heads down
bug fixing/stabilization. As it has
On 8 August 2014 10:52, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote:
I don't dislike rebases because I sometimes use a bit longer version of it.
I would be glad to avoid them because they destroy history that can help me
later.
rebase doesn't destroy any history. gc destroys history.
See git
Hi,
This is to discuss Bug #1231298 - https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1231298
Bug description : When one creates a volume from a snapshot or another volume,
the size argument is calculated automatically. In the case of an image it needs
to be specified though, for something larger than
On 8 August 2014 02:06, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
1: I think that ultimately should live in infra as part of check, but
I'd be ok with it starting as a third party if that delivers us
something faster. I'd be happy enough to donate resources to get that
going if we decide to go
On 7 August 2014 15:31, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 11:58:43 +1200
Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
...
At the moment when cleaning up we don't know if a port was autocreated
by Nova or was passed to us initially through the API.
That seems like
On 08/06/2014 05:41 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 06/08/14 18:12, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
2. since hacking takes tremendous amount of time (you're doing a Cool
Feature (tm), nothing less) you need to update some code from
master, so
you're just merging master in to your branch (i.e. using Git as you'd
I am one of the developers on the project, so I have a strong preference
for option (1).
I think a 3rd option is also possible, which offers a scale down version of
GBP APIs. Contracts could be added in kilo. Provide EndPoints,
EndPointGroups, Rules and Policies. This is the simpler approach
Hi,
Sorry for taking such long time to chime in but these mails were sadly
missed. Please see my inline comments below. My original concerns for the
revert of the service were as follows:
1. What do we do about existing installation. This support was added at
the end of Havana and it is in
This is good work. However, I would suggest you check with some
deployment tools such as devstack to understand additional steps needed
for configuring Heat. For example:
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-dev/devstack/tree/lib/heat#n215
There you can see the role creation work and
Hi John,
see below.
Zitat von John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't know if I fully understand
the limit in options. Stress test seems like it could/should be different
This is correct, Rally and Tempest Stress test have a different
On 06/08/14 14:01, Timur Sufiev wrote:
Hi!
Here is the link: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=5239113
The question is whether the python-pillow package really needed for
proper compiling css from scss in Horizon or is it an optional
requirement which can be safely dropped? The
Hi Michael,
Not sure if I am getting your right. I think your proposal doesn't not perform
well in reality.
Firstly, it is difficult to guess a good time that fix all problems, except
you take forever. Just take the volume creation in my bugfix as example
And while we are on this, just wanted to remind all those interested
to attend the weekly GBP meeting later today:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Mike Cohen co...@noironetworks.com wrote:
Its good to see such a lively debate about
Hi Brandon,
I don't think we've set a specific date to make the transition to IRC
meetings. Is there a particular urgency about this that we should be aware
of?
Stephen
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com
wrote:
When is the plan to move the meeting to
On where to capture notes like this long-term: I would say the wiki is
more searchable for now. When we make the transition to IRC meetings, then
the meeting bots will capture minutes and transcripts in the usual way and
we can link to these from the wiki.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:29 AM,
I had to put the patch back on WIP because yesterday a bug causing a 100%
failure rate slipped in.
It should be an easy fix, and I'm already working on it.
Situations like this, exemplified by [1] are a bit frustrating for all the
people working on improving neutron quality.
Now, if you allow me a
Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Wed 06 Aug 2014 02:10:23 PM PDT, Michael Still wrote:
- we rate limit the total number of blueprints under code review at
any one time to a fixed number of slots. I secretly prefer the term
runway, so I am going to use that for the rest of this email. A
suggested
When I startup nova-network, it stuck at trying get lock for ebtables.
@utils.synchronized('ebtables', external=True)
def ensure_ebtables_rules(rules, table='filter'):
.
Checking the code found that invoke utils.synchronized without parameter
lock_path, the code will try to use
posix
Thanks,
now it is clear that this requirement can be safely dropped.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/08/14 14:01, Timur Sufiev wrote:
Hi!
Here is the link: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=5239113
The question is whether the
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 07:10:23AM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
We seem to be unable to address some key issues in the software we
produce, and part of it is due to strategic contributors (and core
reviewers) being
Just to clarify , I think your case would be run nova-network ,then ^C or
abnormally shutdown it
and it might be during the period of holding a semaphore without releasing
it, right?
guess all component other than nova have this problem ? so maybe remove
this [nova] can get more input ...
Best
On 2014?08?07? 17:13, Chen CH Ji wrote:
Just to clarify , I think your case would be run nova-network ,then ^C
or abnormally shutdown it
and it might be during the period of holding a semaphore without
releasing it, right?
yes, you are right. thanks for the clarify.
guess all component
Dear All,
Let me use my first post to this list to introduce Cyclops and initiate a
discussion towards possibility of this platform as a future incubated
project in OpenStack.
We at Zurich university of Applied Sciences have a python project in open
source (Apache 2 Licensing) that aims to
Hi Devananda,
I have been working on the documentation of some of the areas you listed. I
have updated the bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic/+bug/1323589 by
including the other requirements which I haven't documented yet.
Regards,
Vinay
-Original Message-
From: Devananda van der
Armando M. wrote:
This thread is moving so fast I can't keep up!
The fact that troubles me is that I am unable to grasp how we move
forward, which was the point of this thread to start with. It seems we
have 2 options:
- We make GBP to merge as is, in the Neutron tree, with some minor
Hi folks
I think this thread is still mixing topics. I feel we can archive 1000 mails :P
so let me name it and let me write my thought on this.
[Topic1] Nova parity priority
I do understand concern and this is highest priority.
However, group based policy effort won't slower this effort.
On 2014?08?07? 17:13, Chen CH Ji wrote:
Just to clarify , I think your case would be run nova-network ,then ^C
or abnormally shutdown it
and it might be during the period of holding a semaphore without
releasing it, right?
yes, you are right. thanks for the clarify.
guess all component
On 08/07/2014 02:12 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 07:10:23AM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
We seem to be unable to address some key issues in the software we
produce, and part of it is due to
On 08/06/2014 11:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 7 August 2014 15:31, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 11:58:43 +1200
Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
...
At the moment when cleaning up we don't know if a port was autocreated
by Nova or was passed to
I'm sure this is well known, but I recently encountered this problem for
the second time.
---
foo:
import oslo.config as cfg
import bar
CONF = cfg.CONF
CONF.register_opts('foo_opt')
---
bar:
import oslo.config as cfg
CONF = cfg.CONF
def bar_func(arg=CONF.foo_opt):
pass
---
importing foo
Hi,
by default we don't set nameserver when setting up neutron subnet used
by overcloud nodes, then nameserver points to the machine where
undercloud's dnsmasq is running.
I wonder if we should not change *default* devtest setup to allow dns
resolving not only for local network but for
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 09:44:12 -0400
From: Sean Dague s...@dague.net
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Which program for Rally
Message-ID: 53e2312c.8000...@dague.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Like the fact that right now the rally team is
Patch [1] will solve the observed issue. It has already passed Jenkins
tests.
As it is a nova patch, the neutron full job did not run for it.
To check the neutron full job outcome with [1], please check [2].
Salvatore
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112541/
[2]
Hi!
Didn't read the spec thoroughly, but I'm concerned by it's huge scope.
It's actually several specs squashed into one (not too detailed). My
vote is splitting it into a chain of specs (at least 3: power driver,
discovery, other configurations) and seek exception separately.
Actually, I'm +1 on
On 2014-08-06 7:58 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
I'm astounded by this proposal - it doesn't remove the garbage
collection complexity at all - it transfers it from our code - Nova -
onto end users. So rather than one tested and consolidated
implementation, we'll have one implementation in
On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 15:48 -0600, John Griffith wrote:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't know if I fully
understand the limit in options. Stress test seems like it
could/should be different (again overlap isn't a horrible thing) and I
don't see it as siphoning off resources so
Meeting Summary (HTML):
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nfv/2014/nfv.2014-08-06-14.00.html
Meeting Log (HTML):
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nfv/2014/nfv.2014-08-06-14.00.log.html
Meeting Summary (TXT):
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nfv/2014/nfv.2014-08-06-14.00.txt
On 08/06/2014 05:48 PM, John Griffith wrote:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't know if I fully
understand the limit in options. Stress test seems like it could/should
be different (again overlap isn't a horrible thing) and I don't see it
as siphoning off resources so not sure of
Hi!
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 12:33 -0700, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
Hi all!
The following idea came out of last week's midcycle for how to improve
our spec process and tracking on launchpad. I think most of us liked
it, but of course, not everyone was there, so I'll attempt to write
out
On 08/07/2014 07:58 AM, Angus Salkeld wrote:
On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 15:48 -0600, John Griffith wrote:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't know if I fully
understand the limit in options. Stress test seems like it
could/should be different (again overlap isn't a horrible thing) and
On 6 August 2014 18:54, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
So, Liyi Meng has an interesting patch up for Nova:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/104876
1) We should just deprecate both the options, with a note in the option help
text that these options are not used when volume size is not 0,
On 08/07/2014 04:49 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Wed 06 Aug 2014 02:10:23 PM PDT, Michael Still wrote:
- we rate limit the total number of blueprints under code review at
any one time to a fixed number of slots. I secretly prefer the term
runway, so I am going to use
On 08/07/2014 08:54 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/07/2014 04:49 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Wed 06 Aug 2014 02:10:23 PM PDT, Michael Still wrote:
- we rate limit the total number of blueprints under code review at
any one time to a fixed number of slots. I secretly
On 08/07/2014 09:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote: I think the difference is
slot selection would just be Nova drivers. I
think there is an assumption in the old system that everyone in Nova
core wants to prioritize the blueprints. I think there are a bunch of
folks in Nova core that are happy having
On 08/06/2014 11:51 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
Hi everyone,
With the incredible growth of OpenStack, our development community is
facing complex challenges. How we handle those might determine the
ultimate success or failure of OpenStack.
With this cycle we hit new limits in our processes,
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/07/2014 09:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote: I think the difference is
slot selection would just be Nova drivers. I
think there is an assumption in the old system that everyone in Nova
core wants to prioritize the
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/07/2014 09:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote: I think the difference is
slot selection would just be Nova drivers. I
think there is an assumption in
Unfortunately this is a known issue. We're working on a fix:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo/+bug/1327946
On 08/07/2014 03:57 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
When I startup nova-network, it stuck at trying get lock for ebtables.
@utils.synchronized('ebtables', external=True)
def
Oops, thanks
On 2014年08月07日 22:08, Ben Nemec wrote:
Unfortunately this is a known issue. We're working on a fix:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo/+bug/1327946
On 08/07/2014 03:57 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
When I startup nova-network, it stuck at trying get lock for ebtables.
Hi neutron folks,
Today should have been 'Bug squashing day' where we go over existing bugs
filed for the project and triage/prioritize/comment on them.
I've created an etherpad with (hopefully) full list of neutron bugs:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-bug-squashing-day-2014-08-07
I
On 07/08/14 11:11, Timur Sufiev wrote:
Thanks,
now it is clear that this requirement can be safely dropped.
As I said, it's required during build time, if you execute the tests
during build.
It's not a runtime dependency; the page you were referring to is from
the build system.
Matthias
On 7/18/2014 2:55 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:13:13PM -0700, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/17/2014 02:31 PM, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
It kind of helps. It's still implicit in that you need to look at
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Eugene Nikanorov
enikano...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi neutron folks,
Today should have been 'Bug squashing day' where we go over existing bugs
filed for the project and triage/prioritize/comment on them.
I've created an etherpad with (hopefully) full list of
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
