Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Solar] Integration in 9.0

> On 26 Feb 2016, at 14:40, Jedrzej Nowak wrote: > > 3. describe this everything in fuel docs > > Maybe instead blueprint in 1st step should we create full blown fuel-spec ? > That spec obviously will not require any QA activities. If we actually need feedback, then we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] PostgreSQL 9.3 and JSON operations

Hi, Just wondering what is fine result and decision? This change is pretty wide and impacts many dev (and users), I think we should be listening to the feedback before making any decision. Regards, > On 17 Dec 2015, at 11:01, Artem Silenkov wrote: > > Hello! > We

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

I agree with Evgeny: from work organization it would more optimal to have 2 repos. API and system facing programming are completely different domains, requiring different skill sets. In my opinion separation would lower the entry barriers. Regards, > On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:53, Evgeniy L

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Experimental Task Based Deployment Landed into Master

Great job, especially considering complexity of the problem and late arrival. This proves that magic still can happen :) Regards, > On 12 Dec 2015, at 00:25, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > > Fuelers > > I am thrilled to announce that task based deployment engine [0] has

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] CentOS-7 Transition Plan

> On 23 Nov 2015, at 23:57, Igor Kalnitsky wrote: > > Hey Dmitry, > > Thank you for your effort. I believe it's a huge step forward that > opens number of possibilities. > >> Every container runs systemd as PID 1 process instead of >> supervisord or application /

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

> On 23 Oct 2015, at 16:09, Sergey Lukjanov wrote: > > Hi folks, > > component lead elections ended as well. > > Congrats to Sergii Golovatiuk for becoming official Fuel-library component > lead! > > Results:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Proposal to freeze old Fuel CLI

+1 here. There were very little implemented in the new client in terms of feature parity, it’s not ready to be real replacement yet. > On 14 Oct 2015, at 11:13, Sebastian Kalinowski > wrote: > > Roman, this was already discussed in [1]. > The conclusion was that we

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

imir Kuklin <vkuk...@mirantis.com> wrote: > +1 to Igor. Do we have voting system set up? > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:35 AM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com> > wrote: > > * September 29 - October 8: PTL elections > > So, it's in progress. Where I can v

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][PTL] PTL Candidates Q Session

Hi That’s right, but we made slight change here: "Define architecture direction & review majority of design specs. Rely on Component Leads and Core Reviewers" So we assume that detailed architectural work will be relayed to Component Leads > On 02 Oct 2015, at 10:12, Evgeniy L

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] PTL & Component Leads elections

> On 18 Sep 2015, at 04:39, Sergey Lukjanov wrote: > > > Time line: > > PTL elections > * September 18 - September 28, 21:59 UTC: Open candidacy for PTL position > * September 29 - October 8: PTL elections Just a reminder that we have a deadline for candidates today.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Nominating Alex Schultz to Fuel-Library Core

> On 02 Sep 2015, at 01:31, Sergii Golovatiuk wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to nominate Alex Schultz to Fuel-Library Core team. He’s been > doing a great job in writing patches. At the same time his reviews are solid > with comments for further improvements. He’s

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Code review process in Fuel and related issues

> On 01 Sep 2015, at 03:43, Igor Kalnitsky wrote: > > Hi folks, > > So basically.. > > * core reviewers won't be feature leads anymore > * core reviewers won't be assigned to features (or at least not full-time) > * core reviewers will spend time doing review and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Code review process in Fuel and related issues

On 27 Aug 2015, at 07:58, Evgeniy L e...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi Mike, I have several comments. SLA should be the driver of doing timely reviews, however we can’t allow to fast-track code into master suffering quality of review ... As for me the idea of SLA contradicts to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Nominate Aleksandr Didenko for fuel-library core

On 02 Jul 2015, at 06:59, Mike Scherbakov mscherba...@mirantis.com wrote: Alex - congratulations! Added you to fuel-library core. Also congrats from me, well deserved! Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Product Engineering - Poland

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Rabbitmq 3.4.0 upgrade for the 6.1 release, is it worth it?

I’m -1 for it. Considering how much time we needed to troubleshoot the problems already, I don’t think we have time to properly test the upgrade. On 29 Apr 2015, at 12:37, Sergii Golovatiuk sgolovat...@mirantis.com wrote: -1 for upgrading it in 6.1. Known devil is better than unknown angel

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel]Format of notifications about Ubuntu repositories connectivity

On 17 Apr 2015, at 14:35, Maciej Kwiek mkw...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi, I am currently implementing fix for https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1439686 . I plan to notify user about nodes which fail to connect to ubuntu repositories via fuel notifications. My question is as follows:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] removing single mode

Do you mean single node? On 15 Apr 2015, at 17:04, Dmitry Pyzhov dpyz...@mirantis.com wrote: FYI. We are going to disable Multi-node mode on UI even in experimental mode. And we will remove related code from nailgun in 7.0. https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1428054 On Fri, Jan 30,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] removing single mode

. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Tomasz Napierala tnapier...@mirantis.com wrote: Do you mean single node? On 15 Apr 2015, at 17:04, Dmitry Pyzhov dpyz...@mirantis.com wrote: FYI. We are going to disable Multi-node mode on UI even in experimental mode. And we will remove related code

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Sebastian Kalinowski for fuel-web/python-fuelclient core

Congratulations Sebastian! Regards On 15 Apr 2015, at 10:06, Igor Kalnitsky ikalnit...@mirantis.com wrote: Well, looks like there's no objections and voting is over. :) Welcome aboard, Sebastian! On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk sgolovat...@mirantis.com wrote: +1

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Irina Povolotskaya for fuel-docs core

+1 definately On 25 Mar 2015, at 20:10, Dmitry Borodaenko dborodae...@mirantis.com wrote: Fuelers, I'd like to nominate Irina Povolotskaya for the fuel-docs-core team. She has contributed thousands of lines of documentation to Fuel over the past several months, and has been a diligent

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Fuel meeting participation.

On 17 Mar 2015, at 01:12, Andrew Woodward xar...@gmail.com wrote: The last couple of meetings have been visibly low on participation. Most notably anyone not involved with the planned schedule is not participating. Often I find that the discussion leeds to wanting to talk with more of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Recent issues with our review workflow

On 09 Mar 2015, at 18:21, Ryan Moe r...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi All, I've noticed a few times recently where reviews have been abandoned by people who were not the original authors. These reviews were only days old and there was no prior notice or discussion. This is both rude and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Cache for packages on master node

On 10 Feb 2015, at 23:02, Andrew Woodward xar...@gmail.com wrote: previously we used squid in 3.0 and before. The main problem is that the deployment would proceeded even if not all the packages where cached or even available on the remote. This often lead to broken deployments that where

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Cache for packages on master node

Hi, We are currently redesigning our apporach to upstream distributions and obviusly we will need some cache system for packages on master node. It should work for deb and rpm packages, and be able to serve up to 200 nodes. I know we had bad experience in the past, can you guys share your

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] MVP implementation of Granular Deployment merged into Fuel master branch

Hi, I also think, that after release we should run restrospective and actually analyse how much reality differs from the spec. This will help us improve planning in the future. On 03 Feb 2015, at 22:15, Andrey Danin ada...@mirantis.com wrote: I totally agree with Andrew. On Tuesday,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Puppet] Manifests for granular deploy steps and testing results against the host OS

I hope, we don’t even consider using python for that. Let’s be as close as possible to community and use rspec for manifests. Regards, On 29 Jan 2015, at 09:50, Vladimir Kuklin vkuk...@mirantis.com wrote: Guys, could you point out where I suggested to use python for testing puppet

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Change diagnostic snapshot compression algoritm

Guys, We have requests for this improvement. It will help with huge environments, we are talking about 5GiB of logs. Is it on the agenda? Regards, On 22 Dec 2014, at 07:28, Bartlomiej Piotrowski bpiotrow...@mirantis.com wrote: FYI, xz with multithreading support (5.2 release) has been

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] removing single mode

+1, long awaited On 27 Jan 2015, at 14:05, Aleksandr Didenko adide...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi, After starting implementing granular deployment we've faced a bunch of issues that would make further development of this feature much more complicated if we have to support both Simple and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Proposal for nominating people to python-fuelclient-core

+1 On 26 Jan 2015, at 11:33, Roman Prykhodchenko m...@romcheg.me wrote: Hi Guys, According to our previous thread [1] and the decision made there I’d like to initiate separation of the original fuel-core group. At the first step propose the following python guys from the original

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] 10Gbe performance issue.

On 20 Jan 2015, at 17:14, Piotr Korthals piotr.korth...@intel.com wrote: Hi, I am facing issue with performance of 10 Gigabit Ethernet. Environment 2 hosts each: - 2 * Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v2 - Intel 82599ES 10Gb Ethernet - 128GB RAM System: - Centos 6.5 delivered by fuel

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Dropping Python-2.6 support

On 14 Jan 2015, at 09:18, Przemyslaw Kaminski pkamin...@mirantis.com wrote: I just made a general remark regarding why migrating to 2.7 is profitable (I understood Bartek's question this way). The point about Red Hat guaranteeing security fixes to 2.6 is a good one. Also, it's true we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Dropping Python-2.6 support

On 14 Jan 2015, at 08:50, Kamil Sambor ksam...@mirantis.com wrote: Tomasz we are not using ssl in our client so now we not gain anything from moving to 2.7 . I meant „security support” in terms of fixing security issues within Python itself. For 2.6.x line it’s over, as Przemek mentioned

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Dropping Python-2.6 support

On 13 Jan 2015, at 10:51, Przemyslaw Kaminski pkamin...@mirantis.com wrote: For example https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.9/ All official maintenance for Python 2.6, including security patches, has ended. https://hg.python.org/cpython/raw-file/v2.7.9/Misc/NEWS

Re: [openstack-dev] [FUEL] Zabbix in HA mode

Hi Andrew and all! On 05 Jan 2015, at 22:05, Andrew Woodward xar...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Bartosz Kupidura bkupid...@mirantis.com wrote: Hello All, Im working on Zabbix implementation which include HA support. Zabbix server should be deployed on all

Re: [openstack-dev] [FUEL] Bootstrap NTP sync.

On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:00, Stanislaw Bogatkin sbogat...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi guys, We have a little concern related to Fuel bootstrap node NTP sync. Currently we trying to sync time on bootstrap node with master node, but problem is that NTP protocol has long convergence time, so if

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Logs format on UI (High/6.0)

Also +1 here. In huge envs we already have problems with parsing performance. In long long term we need to think about other log management solution On 12 Dec 2014, at 23:17, Igor Kalnitsky ikalnit...@mirantis.com wrote: +1 to stop parsing logs on UI and show them as is. I think it's more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Hard Code Freeze for 6.0

Hi, As with 5.1.x, please inform the list if you are rising priority to critical in any bugs targeted to 6.0. Regards, On 09 Dec 2014, at 23:43, Mike Scherbakov mscherba...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi all, I'm glad to announce that we've reached Hard Code Freeze (HCF) [1] criteria for 6.0

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] fuel master monitoring

On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:09, Sergii Golovatiuk sgolovat...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi, monasca looks overcomplicated for the purposes we need. Also it requires Kafka which is Java based transport protocol. I am proposing Sensu. It's architecture is tiny and elegant. Also it uses rabbitmq as

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Power management in Cobbler

On 19 Nov 2014, at 16:10, Vladimir Kozhukalov vkozhuka...@mirantis.com wrote: I am absolutely -1 for using Cobbler for that. Lastly, Ironic guys became much more open for adopting new features (at least if they are implemented in terms of Ironic drivers). Currently, it looks like we are

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Power management in Cobbler

On 19 Nov 2014, at 17:56, Fox, Kevin M kevin@pnnl.gov wrote: Would net booting a minimal discovery image work? You usually can dump ipmi network information from the host. To boot from minimal iso (which is waht we do now) you still need to tell the host to do it. This is where IPMI

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] fuel master monitoring

On 06 Nov 2014, at 12:20, Przemyslaw Kaminski pkamin...@mirantis.com wrote: I didn't mean a robust monitoring system, just something simpler. Notifications is a good idea for FuelWeb. I’m all for that, but if we add it, we need to document ways to clean up space. We could also add some kind

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel]

On 12 Nov 2014, at 17:56, foss geek thefossg...@gmail.com wrote: I am reading Fuel reference-architecture documentation in the below link: http://docs.mirantis.com/openstack/fuel/fuel-5.1/reference-architecture.html#openstack-environment-architecture In the page no 2 note says: Note

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Backup of information about nodes.

On 22 Oct 2014, at 21:03, Adam Lawson alaw...@aqorn.com wrote: What is current best practice to restore a failed Fuel node? It’s documented here: http://docs.mirantis.com/openstack/fuel/fuel-5.1/operations.html#restoring-fuel-master Regards, -- Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Proposing Bogdan Dobrelia and Sergii Golovatiuk as core-reviewers for Fuel Library project

On 10 Oct 2014, at 11:35, Vladimir Kuklin vkuk...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi, Fuelers As you may have noticed our project is growing continuously. And this imposes a requirement of increasing amount of core reviewers. I would like to propose Bogdan Dobrelia(bogdando) and Sergii

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Experimental features and how they affect HCF

On 11 Sep 2014, at 09:19, Mike Scherbakov mscherba...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi all, what about using experimental tag for experimental features? After we implemented feature groups [1], we can divide our features and for complex features, or those which don't get enough QA resources in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [FUEL] Re: SSL in Fuel.

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Blueprints process

to work on. Regards, -- Tomasz Napierala Sr. OpenStack Engineer tnapier...@mirantis.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev