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

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 release-independent schedule (iirc we're tagged as never-release) and since we're

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] governance proposal worth a visit: Write down OpenStack principles

Thierry Carrez wrote: >[...] >In the last years there were a lot of "questions" asked by random >contributors, especially around the "One OpenStack" principle (which >seems to fuel most of the reaction here). Remarks like "we should really >decide once and for all if OpenStack is a collection of

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

Hi Tony, 2016-09-09 9:42 GMT+02:00 Tony Breeds : > Has some impact on octavia (doc-requirements) and rpm-packaging (internal > global-requirements.txt) Yeah, rpm-packaging shouldn't be a blocker on this, since we're just trying to keep a snapshot of g-r that we have

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] governance proposal worth a visit: Write down OpenStack principles

Please, if you haven't, I'd love for you to read Monty's response. He explained in way better words what I was not able too: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-September/103242.html Flavio On 08/09/16 11:32 -0700, Clay Gerrard wrote: On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Chris

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] [release] Release countdown for week R-3, 12 - 16 Sept -- Release Candidate Deadline

On 09/08/2016 08:01 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Focus - All teams should be wrapping up their work to prepare release candidates for the end of Newton. General Notes - The release candidate deadline for Newton releases is 15 Sept. All projects following cycle-based release models

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 Tony. signature.asc

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] governance proposal worth a visit: Write down OpenStack principles

Joshua Harlow wrote: > [...] > This one along with https://review.openstack.org/#/c/365590/ (and others > that I don't know about?) make me wonder what is going on with/in > certain TC folks heads (not in a bad way, but the thought processes that > are spurring these documents to be generated).

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

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, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] governance proposal worth a visit: Write down OpenStack principles

On Fri, Sep 09 2016, gordon chung wrote: > On 08/09/16 09:13 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > >> The truth, for me, is that I agree with most of the things in the >> document. What is problematic for me is that I know a lot of people >> who will not. Because of the ordering of the process and the >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Sean Dague wrote: > [...] > I'm also not very concerned about delayed authority of the PTL. Peaceful > handoff should be a pretty basic tenant in projects. Knowing about it > for a longer time shouldn't be a big deal. If it causes giant strife to > pass the torch from one PTL to the next there is

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

On 9 September 2016 at 08:42, Tony Breeds wrote: > 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Ilya Kutukov for fuel-plugins-core

+1 On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Igor Kalnitsky wrote: > Hey Fuelers, > > I'd like to nominate Ilya for joining fuel-plugins-core group. He's a > top contributor by both reviews [1] and commits [2] over the past > release cycle. Fuel cores, please share your votes. > > -

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

John Griffith wrote: > ​I think Sean Dague made some really good points and I'd tend to lean > that way. Honestly charters, bylaws, governance etc shift or are > rewritten fairly often. Why not just change when we do elections to > correspond with releases and keep the continuity that we have

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Ilya Kutukov for fuel-plugins-core

+1 On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Alexey Stepanov wrote: > +1 > Best regards, > Alexey Stepanov. > > чт, 8 сент. 2016 г., 12:19 Bulat Gaifullin : > >> +1 >> >> Regards, >> Bulat Gaifullin >> Mirantis Inc. >> >> >> >> On 08 Sep 2016, at 12:05,

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

Tony Breeds wrote: 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

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] [tripleo] what's up in upgrades?

On 09/09/2016 12:42 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 4:18 PM, David Moreau Simard wrote: >> How long does the upgrade job take ? > undercloud upgrade is a matter of 10 min max. > overcloud upgrade will be much more, I don't have metrics right now. > matbu maybe?

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] governance proposal worth a visit: Write down OpenStack principles

Chris Dent wrote: There's a governance proposal in progress at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357260/ that I think is worth a visit by anyone interested in the definition and evolution of OpenStack's identity and the processes and guidelines used in OpenStack. I'm assuming that not everyone

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

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Shake Chen wrote: > seem the link is error. > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/367740/ > > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap) > wrote: >> >> Currently kolla gate jobs are failing due to

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

seem the link is error. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/367740/ On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:28 PM, 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.

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

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. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/367416/ -- Best Regards, Swapnil Kulkarni irc : coolsvap

<    1   2