Hi,
In Horizon dashboard, under Admin- System Info we have service lists for
Compute and Block Storage. I have filed a blueprint to populate the Swift
services there.
But while going through the implementation details of Compute Services and
Block Storage Services i got to know that the details
Excerpts from Samuel Merritt's message of 2014-09-09 19:04:58 -0700:
On 9/9/14, 4:47 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Samuel Merritt s...@swiftstack.com wrote:
On 9/9/14, 12:03 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
[snip]
So which is it? Because it sounds like to me
Not arguing if it's suitable to implement this with security-group commands.
To solve the problem, I guess no 20 rules are necessary at all.
You can just add one rules like the following to allow all traffic going
out of the vm.
iptables -I neutron-openvswi-o9LETTERID -j RETURN
Where the id
Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2014-09-08 17:15:04 -0700:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Tyagi, Ishant ishant.ty...@hp.com wrote:
Hi All,
As per the heat mid cycle meetup whiteboard, we have created the
flowchart and sequence diagram for the convergence . Can you please
It would be great if each OpenStack component could provide a maintenance mode
like this… there was some work being considered on Cells
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/disable-child-cell-support which
would have allowed parts of Nova to indicate they were in maintenance.
Something
On 09/10/2014 01:47 AM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Samuel Merritt s...@swiftstack.com wrote:
On 9/9/14, 12:03 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
[snip]
So which is it? Because it sounds like to me it's a thing that actually
does NOT need to diverge in technology in any
There was some discussion of this topic during today's meeting.
Full notes are at
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tripleo/2014/tripleo.2014-09-09-19.04.log.html
starting around 19:24
To summarise, we had one action item, and one comment from dprince which
attracted broad agreement, and
Hello everyone,
Looking at the QoS blueprint (proposed for incubation), I suggest to
consider adding some parameters to Neutron Quotas. Let's suppose using
rate-limit for managing QoS. The quota parameters could be such as
rate_limit (per port) and max_bandwidth (per tenant). In this way it is
After some research, i find the reason for the cycle reference. In closure, the
_fix_paswords.func_closre reference the _fix_passwords. So the
cycle reference happened.
And in https://thp.io/2012/python-gc/python_gc_final_2012-01-22.pdf page 5, it
says that
We observe that Python
Using the quota system would be a nice option to have.
Can you clarify what you mean by cumulative bandwidth for the tenant? It
would be possible to rate limit at the tenant router, but having a
cumulative limit enforced inside of a tenant would be difficult.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:03 AM,
Hi guys,
We (CloudFounders) have been working on developing a storage solution
that we want to integrate in OpenStack (we will release the software
component as open source).
From what i saw in the mailing list here we missed the Juno release so
i guess we'll have to wait until Kilo.
The
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
To me, this means you don't really want a sin bin where you dump
drivers and tell them not to come out until they're fit to be
reviewed by the core; You want a trusted driver community which does
its own reviews and means
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:54:20PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote:
[...]
How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on?
A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon was a
cold and emotionless way to provide
On 09/09/2014 09:03 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 09/04/2014 01:30 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-09-04 00:08:47 -0700:
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the meeting some concerns arose. I've listed those
+1
On 09/09/2014 08:32 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
As I'm sure many have noticed, he has been above our stats requirements
for several months now. More
Le 10/09/2014 10:44, Daniel P. Berrange a écrit :
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
To me, this means you don't really want a sin bin where you dump
drivers and tell them not to come out until they're fit to be
reviewed by the core; You want a trusted driver
All,
The 0.14.0 client breaks all v2 requests when pointed at a glance server
which is running code which is more than a few days old (ie pretty much
any production server).
There's a band-aid patch here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/120143/
and a longer term patch here:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Stanislaw Bogatkin sbogat...@mirantis.com
wrote:
So I think that we need to start on [3]. As this is required for OSt
public
endpoint SSL and also for Fuel SSL it can be quicker to make a first stage
where a self-signed certificate is managed from nailgun and a
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, Samuel Merritt wrote:
On 9/9/14, 4:47 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
The questions now before us are:
- should OpenStack include, in the integrated release, a
messaging-as-a-service component?
I certainly think so. I've worked on a few reasonable-scale web applications,
+1
-Original Message-
From: Ladislav Smola [mailto:lsm...@redhat.com]
Sent: 10 September 2014 10:26
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Propose adding StevenK to core
reviewers
+1
On 09/09/2014 08:32 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Hello
Hi,
Nejc has been doing a great work and has been very helpful during the
Juno cycle and his help is very valuable.
I'd like to propose that we add Nejc Saje to the ceilometer-core group.
Please, dear ceilometer-core members, reply with your votes!
--
Julien Danjou
// Free Software hacker
//
On 09/10/2014 11:52 AM, stuart.mcla...@hp.com wrote:
All,
The 0.14.0 client breaks all v2 requests when pointed at a glance server
which is running code which is more than a few days old (ie pretty much
any production server).
There's a band-aid patch here:
Hi
+1
Cheers,
--
Chris Jones
On 9 Sep 2014, at 19:32, Gregory Haynes g...@greghaynes.net wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
As I'm sure many have noticed, he has been above
Hello,
Thanks for the detailed email, Stanislaw. Your suggestion of deploying a CA
container is really interesting. Especially for OSTF and other testing
since the tools only need to know about the root CA.
Lets back up a bit and list the different options for Fuel users:
0/ The user is happy
On 09/09/2014 09:19 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Hi folks,
In this second round of performance testing, I benchmarked the new Redis
driver. I used the same setup and tests as in Round 1 to make it easier to
compare the two drivers. I did not test Redis in master-slave mode, but
that likely
On 09/09/14 20:32, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
As I'm sure many have noticed, he has been above our stats requirements
for several months now. More
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Nathan Kinder nkin...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 01:43 AM, Marcos Fermin Lobo wrote:
Hi all,
I found two functionalities for keystone that could be against each
other.
Multi-domain feature (This functionality is new in Juno.)
Hi,
+1 from me, and thanks for the nice work so far.
Best Regards,
Ildikó
-Original Message-
From: Julien Danjou [mailto:jul...@danjou.info]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 12:35 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding Nejc Saje to
On 10 Sep 2014, at 12:54, Simon Pasquier spasqu...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hello,
Lets back up a bit and list the different options for Fuel users:
0/ The user is happy with plain HTTP.
= Already supported :)
1/ The user wants HTTPS but doesn't want the burden associated with
certificate
On 09/10/2014 11:52 AM, stuart.mclaren at hp.com wrote:
All,
The 0.14.0 client breaks all v2 requests when pointed at a glance server
which is running code which is more than a few days old (ie pretty much
any production server).
There's a band-aid patch here:
On 09/10/2014 01:40 PM, stuart.mcla...@hp.com wrote:
On 09/10/2014 11:52 AM, stuart.mclaren at hp.com wrote:
All,
The 0.14.0 client breaks all v2 requests when pointed at a glance server
which is running code which is more than a few days old (ie pretty much
any production server).
Hi,
Tomasz is right. Let's try not to complicate the things. For 6.0 we'll
allow just upload key, csr, certificate (like 3 edit boxes), or these edit
boxes will be greyed if customer allows to generate self-signed
certificates.
--
Best regards,
Sergii Golovatiuk,
Skype #golserge
IRC #holser
Hello mdb contributors,
As far as we are growing and not the one solid team as it was before, it is
important to make step forward to openness of technical decisions and
agreements.
OpenStack community has a great experience in it, but I'm not sure if we
need such a formal process with specs
Hi,
we are working on bug-1211011 (Flavors created in parent cell are not
propagated to the child cell)..
we need a few pointers from the community (and people working with cells).
The problem is that if the instance_type tables are not in sync in
all cells we can spawn a
different flavor than
Joe Gordon wrote:
To that end, I would like to propose an exercise as discussed in the TC
meeting yesterday [1]:
Have anyone interested (especially TC members) come up with a list of
what they think the project wide Kilo cycle goals should be and post
them on this thread by end of day
Hi, everyone,
as a follow-up for discussion [1] we created stable/5.1 branch for all Fuel
projects.
Since now on all patches targeted for upcoming 5.1 release should go to
master branch first and then should be cherry-picked to stable/5.1.
CI Infrastructure branching is in progress. With any
Flavio Percoco wrote:
[...]
Based on the feedback from the meeting[3], the current main concern is:
- Do we need a messaging service with a feature-set akin to SQS+SNS?
[...]
I think we do need, as Samuel puts it, some sort of durable
message-broker/queue-server thing. It's a basic
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Tomasz Napierala tnapier...@mirantis.com
wrote:
Regarding
After careful consideration, I think that for 6.0 we will only be able to
implement [2] with limited functionality. In terms of certificate
management, we could offer uploading customer generated cert
Using the quota system would be a nice option to have.
Can you clarify what you mean by cumulative bandwidth for the tenant? It would
be possible to rate limit at the tenant router, but having a cumulative limit
enforced inside of a tenant would be difficult.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:03 AM,
On 09/10/2014 09:58 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
To clarify the doubts of what Zaqar is or it's not, let me quote what's
written in the project's overview section[0]:
Zaqar is a multi-tenant cloud messaging service for web developers.
How are different tenants isolated from each other?
Hello Fuelers,
I've figured out that there is a blueprint regarding node naming (
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/node-naming). It looks like
this this feature really has not been started. That being said all
necessary preparations in Nailgun code have been already done. The only
thing
+1
On 09/09/2014 02:32 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
As I'm sure many have noticed, he has been above our stats requirements
for several months now. More
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Emilien Macchi
emilien.mac...@enovance.com wrote:
Hi TripleO community,
I would be really interested by helping to bring Puppet elements support
in TripleO.
So far I've seen this work:
https://github.com/agroup/tripleo-puppet-elements/tree/puppet_dev_heat
On 09/10/2014 01:51 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
I think we do need, as Samuel puts it, some sort of durable
message-broker/queue-server thing. It's a basic application building
block. Some claim it's THE basic application building block, more useful
than database provisioning. It's definitely a
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Gregory Haynes g...@greghaynes.net wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
+1. Steven has also been doing great work on os-cloud-config, I think
he'd make
Hello all,
cirros 0.3.3 has been released. It is available for download at
http://download.cirros-cloud.net/0.3.3 .
The changes since 0.3.2 are:
- Wrap udhcpc to provide for easier passing of options including
those required to get MTU set properly. (LP: #1301958)
- Busybox: enable nc
On 09/09/2014 08:32 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have been working on a meta-review of StevenK's reviews and I would
like to propose him as a new member of our core team.
As I'm sure many have noticed, he has been above our stats requirements
for several months now. More
Hi all,
let us give the latest status on deploy upstream OpenStack by Fuel [1].
We consider a several use cases:
1.
I want to build Fuel ISO with latest pre-built OpenStack vanilla
packages. In this case packages will be downloaded from repository, which
is automatically built on
Hi Everyone,
Just a quick reminder that the weekly OpenStack QA team IRC meeting will be
this Thursday, September 11th at 17:00 UTC in the #openstack-meeting channel.
The agenda for tomorrow's meeting can be found here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting
Anyone is welcome to
On 09/10/2014 12:47 AM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
As was pointed out in the TC meeting today, Zaqar is (was?) actually
aiming to provide Messaging-as-a-Service -- not queueing as a service!
This is another way of saying it's more like email and less like
AMQP
The glossary[1] describes a
Going through the untriaged Nova bugs, and there are a few on a similar
pattern:
Nova operation in progress takes a while
Crosses keystone token expiration time
Timeout thrown
Operation fails
Terrible 500 error sent back to user
It seems like we should have a standard pattern that on token
I think at least clients supporting keystone sessions that are configured
to use the auth.Password mech supports this since re-auth is done by the
session rather then the service client itself.
2014-09-10 16:14 GMT+02:00 Sean Dague s...@dague.net:
Going through the untriaged Nova bugs, and
On 9/9/14, 7:51 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 09/09/2014 06:57 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Hi Jay,
The main component that won't work without direct integration is
enforcing policy on calls directly to Neutron and calls between the
plugins inside of Neutron. However, that's only one component of GBP.
On 09/10/2014 03:57 AM, Steven Hardy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:54:20PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-09-04 11:01:55 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote:
[...]
How would people feel about turning [auto-abandon] back on?
A lot of reviewers (myself among them) feel auto-abandon
On 09/09/2014 11:22 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 09/09/2014 05:24 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi.
One of the last things blocking Ironic from graduating is deciding
whether or not we need a Nova API proxy for the old baremetal
extension to new fangled Ironic API. The TC has asked that we
Do we know which versions of the clients do that?
-Sean
On 09/10/2014 10:22 AM, Endre Karlson wrote:
I think at least clients supporting keystone sessions that are
configured to use the auth.Password mech supports this since re-auth is
done by the session rather then the service
tl;dr I'm concerned we're conflating user concerns and contributor
concerns. I'd like to see laser focus on two things that help both: 1)
Define layers in our governance and integration efforts 2) Pay down
technical debt with a focus on supporting users.
more
Great kick off Joe, thanks. I have
All the various bug triage graphs point out to webnumbr urls from our
wiki - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BugTriage
All of webnumbr appears to be dead and not returning any data.
Why this service was used predates me. Does anyone know why? Anyone know
if it's going to come back? Or should we
Hi Dmitry,
It's not as easy as you think. The node's name may be reseted during
some of our actions. For example, if you remove node from a cluster a
node's name will be reseted.
So the idea of the blueprint [1] is to provide mechanism when you once
set names and they will not be reseted.
[1]:
On 9/9/2014 4:19 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
As we try to stabilize OpenStack Juno, many server projects need to get
out final client releases that expose new features of their servers.
While this seems like not a big deal, each of these clients releases
ends up having possibly destabilizing impacts
Bug squash day worked well on 9/9 -- squashing and triaging bugs, bringing
the openstack-manuals backlog to about 400, with 50 in progress even now!
The openstack-api-site backlog went to about 200 with 15 in progress. We
also had some fairly new docs contributors join in -- thank you everyone
who
Hi folks,
Some of you may know that there is ongoing work to achieve kindof
data-driven orchestration
for Fuel. If this is new to you, please get familiar with spec:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113491/
Knowing that running random command on nodes will be probably most usable
type of
Also, how about checking for duplicated name? That it matches standard for
DNS?
return u{node_id}.format(node_id=instance.name.lower())
you could just return instance.name.lower() I believe..
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Igor Kalnitsky ikalnit...@mirantis.com
wrote:
Hi Dmitry,
It's not
On 10/09/14 22:51, Sean Dague wrote:
All the various bug triage graphs point out to webnumbr urls from our
wiki - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BugTriage
All of webnumbr appears to be dead and not returning any data.
Why this service was used predates me. Does anyone know why? Anyone
Hi,
I see that the OpenStack high availability guide is still recommending
the active/standby method of configuring RabbitMQ.
Has anyone tried using active/active with mirrored queues as recommended
by the RabbitMQ developers? If so, what problems did you run into?
Thanks,
Chris
Sean Dague wrote:
All the various bug triage graphs point out to webnumbr urls from our
wiki - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BugTriage
All of webnumbr appears to be dead and not returning any data.
Why this service was used predates me. Does anyone know why? Anyone know
if it's going to
我将从 2014/09/10 开始离开办公室，到 2014/09/11 时返回。
我将在回来之后答复您的消息。
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail (and
any attachment transmitted herewith) is privileged and confidential and is
intended for the exclusive
Hi,
as for execution of arbitrary code across the OpenStack cluster - I was
thinking of mcollective + fact filters:
1) we need to start using mcollective facts [0] [2] - we don't
use/configure this currently
2) use mcollective execute_shell_command agent (or any other agent) with
fact filter [1]
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:14:32AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
Going through the untriaged Nova bugs, and there are a few on a similar
pattern:
Nova operation in progress takes a while
Crosses keystone token expiration time
Timeout thrown
Operation fails
Terrible 500 error sent back to
I noticed that the build is using JSHint now, and before I consider
syncing it with the proposed options from the JavaScript best practices
(https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117595/), I wanted to double check and
be sure Horizon got past the legal problem with the good/evil licensing.
Some
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
To me, this means you don't really want a sin bin where you dump
drivers and tell them not to come out until they're fit to be
reviewed by the
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 9/9/2014 4:19 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
As we try to stabilize OpenStack Juno, many server projects need to get
out final client releases that expose new features of their servers.
While this seems like not a
I thought it might be helpful to show a sample of the output from the
proxied commands: Please find the example here:
http://paste.openstack.org/show/Em861wMwFvrFlsWkugfX
Chris Krelle
NobodyCam
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 09/09/2014 11:22 PM,
On 2014-09-10 09:57:17 +0100 (+0100), Steven Hardy wrote:
I can understand this argument, and perhaps an auto-abandon with a
long period like say a month for the submitter to address comments
and reset the clock would be a reasonable compromise?
Perhaps, but the old script lacked a bunch of
As far as I understand it, though, that's a patch for a read-only mode. It
seems bizzare, and possibly dangerous, to proxy read commands, but not write
commands. It gives the impression that everything's fine until it's not fine
(because someone tried to use an existing script to do a create
JSHint *isn't* Douglas Crockford. It was written by someone who
(understandably)
thought Douglas Crockford had some good ideas, but was overzealous. It does
mostly the
same things, but is more lenient with regards to style elements.
The license is as such:
On Sep 10, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Li Tianqing jaze...@163.com wrote:
After some research, i find the reason for the cycle reference. In closure,
the _fix_paswords.func_closre reference the _fix_passwords. So the
cycle reference happened.
And in
On 2014-09-10 10:56:37 -0500 (-0500), Aaron Sahlin wrote:
[...]
Did Horizon get permission or find some way around the licensing
issue?
It's worth mentioning that he seems to consider the free software
legal concerns around his license choice amusing and will
apparently, upon request, provide
On 2014-09-10 13:00:29 -0400 (-0400), Solly Ross wrote:
JSHint *isn't* Douglas Crockford. It was written by someone who
(understandably) thought Douglas Crockford had some good ideas,
but was overzealous.
[...]
Overzealous enough to copy his code.
The license is as such:
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 1:10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] Licensing issue with using JSHint in
On 09/05/2014 12:36 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
How can the average deployer know whether a stackforge is
a. An early prototype which has completed (such as some of the
early LBaaS packages)
b. A project which has lost its initial steam and further
investment is not foreseen
c.
On 09/10/2014 02:27 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Well, both proposals can be done : we can create subteams and the
Subteam-Approval Gerrit label right know before Kilo, and we could split
the virt repos by later once the interfaces and prereqs are done.
That's what I mean in fact: create sub team
What you are finding is the same as I found, which raised my concern.
Thanks for the pointer to legal-disc...@lists.openstack.org, I will post
the question there (let the lawyers figure it out).
On 9/10/2014 12:16 PM, Solly Ross wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Stanley
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
Sent: 10 September 2014 19:29
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Comments on the concerns arose during
the TC meeting
On 09/05/2014 12:36 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
How
Hello OpenStack Team,
I have a use case where I want to host/manage a mix environment with VM's and
baremetal servers through Overcloud (Horizon/CLI). To be specific, I am looking
for an ability to create a new server on baremetal machine (instead of Vm)
through Horizon and manage the instance
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Joe Gordon wrote:
To that end, I would like to propose an exercise as discussed in the TC
meeting yesterday [1]:
Have anyone interested (especially TC members) come up with a list of
what they think the project wide
I don't get that logic at all.
Proxying the read commands means that monitoring or report scripts will
work fine. Actual state transition scripts, which can't really work
correctly, as there are too many differences, won't.
-Sean
On 09/10/2014 12:57 PM, Solly Ross wrote:
As far as I
Thanks! Looks good. Only thing I noticed was that footnotes were still
referenced, but did not appear at the bottom of the page.
On 9/10/14, 6:16 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
I've collected the information from both performance tests and put it in
the project's wiki[0] Please,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:37:14PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-09-10 09:57:17 +0100 (+0100), Steven Hardy wrote:
I can understand this argument, and perhaps an auto-abandon with a
long period like say a month for the submitter to address comments
and reset the clock would be a
As far as I understand it, though, that's a patch for a read-only
mode. It seems bizzare, and possibly dangerous, to proxy read
commands, but not write commands. It gives the impression that
everything's fine until it's not fine (because someone tried to use
an existing script to do a
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Stefano Maffulli
stef...@openstack.org wrote:
On 09/10/2014 02:27 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Well, both proposals can be done : we can create subteams and the
Subteam-Approval Gerrit label right know before Kilo, and we could split
the virt repos by later once
On 09/03/2014 11:37 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
As you all know, there has recently been several very active discussions
around how to improve assorted aspects of our development process. One idea
that was brought up is to come up with a list of cycle goals/project
priorities for Kilo [0].
To
Excerpts from Gordon Sim's message of 2014-09-10 06:18:52 -0700:
On 09/10/2014 09:58 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
To clarify the doubts of what Zaqar is or it's not, let me quote what's
written in the project's overview section[0]:
Zaqar is a multi-tenant cloud messaging service for web
On 09/03/2014 11:21 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote:
On 9/3/2014 11:32 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
I took some notes on this a few weeks ago and extracted what seemed
to be the two main threads or ideas the were revealed by the
conversation that happened in this thread:
* At the micro level have
On Sep 4, 2014, at 3:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Position statement
==
Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that
Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If
steps are not taken to avert this, the project
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/10/2014 01:13 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
As far as I understand it, though, that's a patch for a
read-only mode. It seems bizzare, and possibly dangerous, to
proxy read commands, but not write commands. It gives the
impression that everything's
On Sep 4, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:36:04PM +, Gary Kotton wrote:
Hi,
I do not think that Nova is in a death spiral. I just think that the
current way of working at the moment is strangling the project. I do not
understand
1) Is this tested anywhere? There are no unit tests in the patch and
it's not clear to me that there would be any Tempest coverage of this
code path. Providing this and having it break a couple of months down
the line seems worse than not providing it at all. This is obviously
fixable
On 09/10/2014 03:14 PM, Ben Nemec wrote:
On 09/10/2014 01:13 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
As far as I understand it, though, that's a patch for a
read-only mode. It seems bizzare, and possibly dangerous, to
proxy read commands, but not write commands. It gives the
impression that everything's fine
On Sep 5, 2014, at 4:12 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:40 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Just some things to think about with regards to the whole idea, by no
means exhaustive.
So maybe the better question is: what are the top sources of technical
debt in Nova that
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
