Re: [openstack-dev] DeployArtifacts considered...complicated?

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 05:17:36PM +0200, Jiří Stránský wrote: > For the puppet modules specifically, we might also add another > directory+mount into the docker-puppet container, which would be blank by > default (unlike the existing, already populated /etc/puppet and >

Re: [openstack-dev] DeployArtifacts considered...complicated?

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:12:54AM -0600, Alex Schultz wrote: > -1 to more services. We take a Heat time penalty for each new > composable service we add and in this case I don't think this should > be a service itself. I think for this case, it would be better suited > as a host prep task than a

Re: [openstack-dev] [zun][zun-ui] Priorities of new feature on Zun UI

Hi Hongbin, Thank you for filling your opinion! I'd like to consider plan for Stein's Zun UI. Best regards, Shu 2018年6月27日(水) 21:45 Hongbin Lu : > Hi Shu, > > Thanks for the raising this discussion. I have filled my opinion in the > etherpad. In general, I am quite satisfied by the current

Re: [openstack-dev] [Edge-computing] [edge][glance][mixmatch]: Wiki of the possible architectures for image synchronisation

In-lined comments / questions below, Greg. From: "Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)" mailto:gergely.csat...@nokia.com>> Date: Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 3:35 AM To: "ekuv...@redhat.com" mailto:ekuv...@redhat.com>>, Greg Waines

[openstack-dev] [Puppet] Requirements for running puppet unit tests?

Hey folks, I'm looking for some guidance on how to successfully run rspec tests for openstack puppet modules (specifically, puppet-keystone). I started with CentOS 7, but running the 'bundle install command' told me: Gem::InstallError: public_suffix requires Ruby version >= 2.1. An error

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tempest-plugins][release][tc][ptl]: Coordinated Release Model proposal for Tempest & Tempest Plugins

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:05:09 +0900 Dmitry Tantsur wrote > On 06/27/2018 03:17 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 23:12:30 +0900 Doug Hellmann > > wrote > > > Excerpts from Matthew Treinish's message of 2018-06-26 09:52:09 -0400:

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Canceling Neutron drivers meeting on June 29th

Dear Neutron Team, This week we don't have RFEs in the triaged stage to be discussed during our weekly drivers meeting. As a consequence, I am canceling the meeting on June 29th at 1400UTC. We have new RFEs and RFEs in the confirmed stage. I encourage the team to look and them, add your opinion

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][heat] Identifying secrets in Barbican

On 28/06/18 15:00, Douglas Mendizabal wrote: Replying inline. [snip] IIRC, using URIs instead of UUIDs was a federation pre-optimization done many years ago when Barbican was brand new and we knew we wanted federation but had no idea how it would work. The rationale was that the URI would

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Problems with multi-regional OpenStack installation

Hi Andrei, Thanks for raising this issue. I'm keen to review and happy to help. I just done a quick look for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578356, it looks good for me. As for heat-container-eingine issue, it's probably a bug. I will test an propose a patch, which needs to release a new image

Re: [openstack-dev] [osc][python-openstackclient] osc-included image signing

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Josephine Seifert wrote: >> Go ahead and post WIP reviews and we can look at it further. To merge >> I'll want all of the usual tests, docs, release notes, etc but don't >> wait if that is not all done up front. > Here are the two WIP reviews: > > cursive:

Re: [openstack-dev] [osc][python-openstackclient] osc-included image signing

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Josephine Seifert wrote: >> Go ahead and post WIP reviews and we can look at it further. To merge >> I'll want all of the usual tests, docs, release notes, etc but don't >> wait if that is not all done up front. > Here are the two WIP reviews: > > cursive:

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] dropping selinux support

Hi Paul: On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:56:22PM -0400, Mohammed Naser wrote: >> Hi everyone: >> >> This email is to ask if there is anyone out there opposed to removing >> SELinux bits from OpenStack ansible, it's blocking some of the gates >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] dropping selinux support

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:56:22PM -0400, Mohammed Naser wrote: > Hi everyone: > > This email is to ask if there is anyone out there opposed to removing > SELinux bits from OpenStack ansible, it's blocking some of the gates > and the maintainers for them are no longer working on the project >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 18-26

I'll weigh in a bit with my operator hat on as recent experience it pertains to the current conversation Kubernetes has largely succeeded in common distribution tools where OpenStack has not been able to. kubeadm was created as a way to centralize deployment best practices, config, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][heat] Identifying secrets in Barbican

Replying inline. On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 16:39 -0400, Zane Bitter wrote: > We're looking at using Barbican to implement a feature in Heat[1] > and > ran into some questions about how secrets are identified in the > client. > > With most openstack clients, resources are identified by a UUID. You

[openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-sig/news

Greetings OpenStack community, Today's meeting covered a few topics, but was mainly focused on a few updates to the errors guideline. We began with a review of last week's actions. Ed Leafe has sent an email[7] to mailing list to let the folks working on the GraphQL experiments know that the

[openstack-dev] [release] Release countdown for week R-8, July 2-6

Your long awaited countdown email... Development Focus - Teams should be focused on implementing planned work for the cycle. It is also a good time to review those plans and reprioritize anything if needed based on the what progress has been made and what looks realistic to

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] dropping selinux support

Also, this is the change that drops it, so feel free to vote with your opinion there too: https://review.openstack.org/578887 Drop SELinux support from os_swift On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Mohammed Naser wrote: > Hi everyone: > > This email is to ask if there is anyone out there opposed

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] dropping selinux support

Hi everyone: This email is to ask if there is anyone out there opposed to removing SELinux bits from OpenStack ansible, it's blocking some of the gates and the maintainers for them are no longer working on the project unfortunately. I'd like to propose removing any SELinux stuff from OSA based

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tempest-plugins][release][tc][ptl]: Coordinated Release Model proposal for Tempest & Tempest Plugins

Excerpts from Dmitry Tantsur's message of 2018-06-28 17:05:09 +0200: > On 06/27/2018 03:17 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > > Users (Not Gate) will face below issues: > > - User cannot use PluginNR with Tempest <19.0.0 (where that new interface > > was not present). And there is no PluginNR

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Shared envdir across tox environments

On 06/28/2018 11:18 AM, Stephen Finucane wrote: Just a quick heads up that an upcoming change to nova's 'tox.ini' will change the behaviour of multiple environments slightly. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534382/9 With this change applied, tox will start sharing environment directories

[openstack-dev] [nova] Shared envdir across tox environments

Just a quick heads up that an upcoming change to nova's 'tox.ini' will change the behaviour of multiple environments slightly. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534382/9 With this change applied, tox will start sharing environment directories (e.g. '.tox/py27') among environments with identical

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tempest-plugins][release][tc][ptl]: Coordinated Release Model proposal for Tempest & Tempest Plugins

On 06/27/2018 03:17 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 23:12:30 +0900 Doug Hellmann wrote > Excerpts from Matthew Treinish's message of 2018-06-26 09:52:09 -0400: > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 08:53:21AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Excerpts from Andrea

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo]Testing ironic in the overcloud

On 23 February 2018 at 14:48, Derek Higgins wrote: > > > On 1 February 2018 at 16:18, Emilien Macchi wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 8:05 AM, Derek Higgins wrote: >> [...] >> >>> o Should I create a new tempest test for baremetal as some of the > networking stuff is different? >

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][tempest-plugins][release][tc][ptl]: Coordinated Release Model proposal for Tempest & Tempest Plugins

On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 04:08:35 +0900 Sean McGinnis wrote > > > > There is no issue of backward incompatibility from Tempest and on Gate. > > GATE > > is always good as it is going with mater version or minimum supported > > version > > in plugins as you mentioned. We take

[openstack-dev] [osc][python-openstackclient] osc-included image signing

Sorry, I wrote partially german in my last mail. Here is the english version ;) > Go ahead and post WIP reviews and we can look at it further. To merge > I'll want all of the usual tests, docs, release notes, etc but don't > wait if that is not all done up front. Here are the two WIP reviews:

Re: [openstack-dev] [osc][python-openstackclient] osc-included image signing

Hi, > Go ahead and post WIP reviews and we can look at it further. To merge > I'll want all of the usual tests, docs, release notes, etc but don't > wait if that is not all done up front. Hier sind die zwei WIP reviews: cursive: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578767/ osc:

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][heat] Identifying secrets in Barbican

For now we found two ways to get a secret, with secret href or with secret URI(which is `secrets/UUID`). We will turn to use secret URI for now for Heat multi cloud support, but is there any reason for Barbican client not to accept only secrets UUID (Secret incorrectly specified error will shows

[openstack-dev] [all] [ptg] PTG high-level schedule

Hi everyone, In the attached picture you will find the proposed schedule for the various tracks at the Denver PTG in September. We did our best to avoid the key conflicts that the track leads (PTLs, SIG leads...) mentioned in their PTG survey responses, although there was no perfect

Re: [openstack-dev] [Edge-computing] [edge][glance][mixmatch]: Wiki of the possible architectures for image synchronisation

Hi, I’ve added the following pros and cons to the different options: * One Glance with multiple backends [1] * Pros: * Relatively easy to implement based on the current

[openstack-dev] [magnum] Problems with multi-regional OpenStack installation

Greetings. Has anyone successfully deployed Magnum in the multi-regional OpenStack installation? In my case different services (Nova, Heat) have different public endpoint in every region. I couldn't start Kube-apiserver until I added "region" to a kube_openstack_config. I created a story with

[openstack-dev] [openstack][karbor] Can karbor restore resource's backup to other region?

Hi All, There are two questions that are bothering me now. Firstly, can Karbor restore resource to other region? Secondly, I have notice that when we create a restore with CLI，the command will be like this: openstack data protection restore create cf56bd3e-97a7-4078-b6d5-f36246333fd9

[openstack-dev] [glance][glance_store] Functional testing of multiple backend

Hi All, In Rocky I have proposed a spec [1] for adding support for multiple backend in glance. I have completed the coding part and so far tested this feature with file, rbd and swift store. However I need support in testing this feature thoroughly. So kindly help me (or provide a way to