On 05/12/13 15:36 -0800, Mark Washenberger wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randall Burt randall.b...@rackspace.com
wrote:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Steve Baker sba...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:46 AM, Mark Washenberger wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:05
On 2013/06/12 00:33, Robert Collins wrote:
There isn't a plan yet, it's just discussion so far. I don't have a
strong feeling of consensus. Lets discuss it more real-time at the
coming TripleO meeting; and I suggest that the Horizon meeting should
also do that, and we can loop back to email
On 12/05/2013 03:01 PM, James Slagle wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 5 December 2013 06:55, James Slagle james.sla...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Robert Collins
Jan, Jordan, Martyn, Jiri and Jaromir are still
On 2013/04/12 08:12, Robert Collins wrote:
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over
time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted
with -core responsibilities.
In this
On Dec 6, 2013 9:57 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Dec 6, 2013, at 1:09 AM, John Dickinson m...@not.mn wrote:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 1:36 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Dec 3, 2013, at 12:18 AM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013
On 12/05/2013 11:40 AM, Jan Provaznik wrote:
On 12/04/2013 08:12 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
And the 90 day not-active-enough status:
| jprovazn **| 220 5 10 7 177.3% | 2 (
9.1%) |
|jomara ** | 210 2 4 15 1190.5% | 2 (
9.5%) |
|
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your answer, I read the blueprint and am aware of what it will
add to the whole resource and scheduling bits of OpenStack.
I guess I'll just continue with what I did and wait for the blueprint to
get implemented, unless there's a quick way to add it to Havana without
waiting
On 12/06/2013 09:56 AM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
On 2013/04/12 08:12, Robert Collins wrote:
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over
time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be
Another alternative is to change role name into role display name,
indicating that the string is only to be used in GUIs, is not guaranteed
to be unique, is set by the role creator, can be any string in any
character set, and is not used by the system anywhere. Only role ID is
used by the system,
Hi OpenStackers,
I am replying to this thread with a smaller delay. I was keeping very
close attention to it but I wanted to let the discussion flow without me
interfering, so I see the community opinion on the UX effort.
First of all, thanks Thierry to starting this thread and the whole
On 2013/05/12 23:14, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 09:36 +0100, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hey OpenStackers,
based on the latest discussions, it was asked if we can try to post
regular updates of what is happening in our community (mostly on Askbot
forum:
2013/12/4 Alan Pevec ape...@gmail.com:
first stable/havana release 2013.2.1 is scheduled[1] to be released
next week on December 12th, so freeze on stable/havana goes into
effect tomorrow EOD, one week before the release.
We're behind with reviewing so we'll be doing soft-freeze today:
Hey Matt,
thanks for the comments, I'll try to reply below:
On 2013/05/12 20:32, Matt Wagner wrote:
On Tue Dec 3 06:53:04 2013, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
I've somehow overlooked the 'Node tags' previously. I'm curious what
format these would take, or if this is something we've discussed. I
I actually don't, for the reasons Clark brought up.
All this does is optimizes for people that don't run unit tests locally,
and make all the jobs take longer. Everything except the tempest jobs
should be easy to run locally.
So this would effectively penalize the people that do the right thing,
Hi
I've just recently started wetting my feet in openstack, so my opinion
is mostly external, and maybe naive, but I think that everybody should
think about UX is not in opposition with having a team that focuses on
it, just like it's nice to have people who focus on security, although
I just tried to read the full spec for this blueprint
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/keystone/+spec/store-quota-data
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/KeystoneCentralizedQuotaManagement
And nothing explains why this blueprint is needed or what it is trying to
accomplish, all it has is a design
Hi Julien,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 16:45 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Mon, Nov 18 2013, Julien Danjou wrote:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/messaging-decouple-cfg
So I've gone through the code and started to write a plan on how I'd do
things:
Along the same lines and while we're talking crazy ideas, one use case
where a user might want to allocate entire nodes would be if TripleO
were used to manage an ARM rack. The use cases aren't identical between
cloud and ARM, but they are similar.
So for a rack of 1000 nodes, there is
Hi,
According to the thread of request-id [1], there seems a need for
a wsgi middleware which generates request-id for each REST
request and ensures it in a corresponding response.
To do this, the middlware is located outer-most of a wsgi pipeline
and needs to catch all kind of exceptions.
It is
Hey everybody,
based on feedback, I updated wireframes for resource management and
summarized changes in Askbot tool:
http://ask-openstackux.rhcloud.com/question/95/tripleo-ui-resource-management/?answer=110#post-id-110
Feel free to follow the discussion there.
I am passing these wireframes
Jaromir Coufal wrote:
[...]
I am not trying to convince anybody here, I accept the decision 'no' (at
least for this moment). I just feel that it was not consensus that most
of people thinks that this is nonsense. I don't see any strong reasons
why not. In time, I believe more people will see
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Jaromir Coufal wrote:
[...]
I am not trying to convince anybody here, I accept the decision 'no' (at
least for this moment). I just feel that it was not consensus that most
of people thinks that this is nonsense.
Hello all!
Yesterday, during the QA meeting, I volunteer myself to help the team
handling bugs and defining a better process to triage them.
Investigating the current bug list, I checked we have:
* 7 critical and high bugs. From those, 3 critical non-assigned:
(2013/12/06 17:57), Joe Gordon wrote:
On Dec 6, 2013 9:57 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com
mailto:ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Dec 6, 2013, at 1:09 AM, John Dickinson m...@not.mn
mailto:m...@not.mn wrote:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 1:36 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 11:38:03AM +1100, Angus Salkeld wrote:
On 05/12/13 17:00 +, Steven Hardy wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:11:37PM +, ELISHA, Moshe (Moshe) wrote:
Hey,
I really liked the v2 Heat API (as proposed in Create a new v2 Heat
On Fri, Dec 06 2013, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hi Mark,
If the goal is allow applications to use oslo.messaging without using
oslo.config, then what's driving this? I'm guessing some possible
answers:
5) But I want to avoid any dependency on oslo.config
I think that's the more important one
On Dec 6, 2013 4:26 PM, Akihiro Motoki mot...@da.jp.nec.com wrote:
(2013/12/06 17:57), Joe Gordon wrote:
On Dec 6, 2013 9:57 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com mailto:
ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Dec 6, 2013, at 1:09 AM, John Dickinson m...@not.mn mailto:
m...@not.mn wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
- Jan Provaznik for removal from -core
- Jordan O'Mara for removal from -core
- Martyn Taylor for removal from -core
- Jiri Tomasek for removal from -core
- Jamomir Coufal for removal from -core
Four
On 2013/06/12 15:16, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
mailto:thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Jaromir Coufal wrote:
[...]
I am not trying to convince anybody here, I accept the decision
'no' (at
least for this
On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 15:41 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Dec 06 2013, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hi Mark,
If the goal is allow applications to use oslo.messaging without using
oslo.config, then what's driving this? I'm guessing some possible
answers:
5) But I want to avoid any
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:48 PM, David Stanek dsta...@dstanek.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Adrian Otto adrian.o...@rackspace.comwrote:
Jamie,
Thanks for the guidance here. I am checking to see if any of our
developers might take an interest in helping with the upstream work. At
Hey all,
We're starting to work on the UI for tuskar based on Jarda's wireframes, and as
we're doing so, we're realizing that
we're not quite sure what development methodology is appropriate. Some
questions:
a) Because we're essentially doing a tear-down and re-build of the whole
Hi All,
We are using in our company for a prototype the docker hypervisor on
openstack. We have the need to mount a folder inside of a container.
To achieve this goal I have implemented a hack which allows to specify
a folder mount via nova metadata. For example a heat template could
look like:
On 11/13/2013 06:09 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:52 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 11/13/2013 08:30 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
Hi, guys
This is the document for the changes from Nova v2 api to v3:
On 12/06/2013 08:35 AM, John Wood wrote:
Hello folks,
Just an FYI that I've submitted a pull request [1] to replace Celery
with oslo.messaging.
wow. That was quick!
/me is impressed
Since you jumped on that - I went ahead and jumped on a pbr-ification
patch for you. It may not work yet -
On 12/06/2013 10:54 AM, Daniel Kuffner wrote:
Hi All,
We are using in our company for a prototype the docker hypervisor on
openstack. We have the need to mount a folder inside of a container.
To achieve this goal I have implemented a hack which allows to specify
a folder mount via nova
On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 7:22:23 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
TL;DR: Gate is failing 23% of the time due to bugs in nova, neutron
and tempest. We need help fixing these bugs.
Hi All,
Before going any further we have a bug that is affecting gate and
stable, so its getting top priority here.
I have been trying to review all of the nova v3 changes. Many of these
patches have been around for awhile and have not kept up with changes
that were made to the v2 tests after a v2 test file was copied to v3. I
think any one submitting a patch to the nova v2 test code needs to file
a bug
I really have to agree with this. It's especially important if oslo.messaging
is also used in libraries like taskflow. If oslo.messaging imposes that users
of it must use oslo.config then by using it in taskflow, taskflow then imposes
the same oslo.config usage. This makes all libraries that
Hey all!
Things keep getting more complex around here, so we keep doing more stuffs.
Up until today, a project's forced participation on the OpenStack PyPI
Mirror (pypi.openstack.org) while in the gate was controllled by the
project being prefixed with openstack/. Well, that's clearly not rich
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:32 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/05/2013 04:25 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Andrew Plunk's message of 2013-12-05 12:42:49 -0800:
Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2013-12-05 09:05:44 -0800:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Clint Byrum
That’s a good question. IMO, this is an important use case, and should be
considered within scope of the project.
Rackspace uses a precursor to Marconi for its Cloud Backup product, and it has
worked out well for showing semi-realtime updates, e.g., progress on an active
backup jobs. We have a
Hi!
In the QA meeting yesterday, we decide to create a blueprint specific
for the negative tests in a separate file:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/negative-test-files and
use it to track the patches.
I added the etherpad link Ken'ichi pointed to this bp. Ken'ichi, should
On 2013-12-05 21:38, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 12/04/2013 12:10 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 12/04/2013 11:16 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Resurrecting this thread because of an interesting review that came
up
yesterday [1].
It seems that our lack of a firm decision on what to do with the
mocking
On 12/06/2013 05:36 PM, Ben Nemec wrote:
On 2013-12-06 03:22, Ladislav Smola wrote:
On 12/06/2013 09:56 AM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
On 2013/04/12 08:12, Robert Collins wrote:
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2013-12-03 23:12:39 -0800:
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over
time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted
with -core
So it still seems that we are at an impasse here on getting new olso
lockutils into cinder because it doesn't come with a working default.
As a recap - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/48935/ (that sync)
is blocked by failing upgrade testing, because lock_path has no default,
so it has to land
Previous not precious, ha, durn autocorrect, lol.
Sent from my really tiny device...
On Dec 6, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
Forgive me for not understanding your precious email (which I guess was
confusing for me to understand). This one clears that up. If
Forgive me for not understanding your precious email (which I guess was
confusing for me to understand). This one clears that up. If only we all had
Vulcan mind meld capabilities, haha.
Thanks for helping me understand, no need to get frustrated. Not everyone is
able to decipher your email in
Thanks!
Commented on bp whiteboard.
2013/12/5 Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com:
ok, My pleasure to help,
I created a bp for it:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/vpn-multiple-subnet
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Nachi Ueno na...@ntti3.com wrote:
Hi Yong
Yes, to
Hi, I've been out for nearly 3 weeks and noticed Compute meter names are now
prefaced by instance:
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/ceilometer/measurements.html
Not sure when this happened but I was wondering if the change applies across
all OpenStack. Will Nova use the change for
Could jsonschema[1] be used here to do the options schema part? It works on
dictionaries (and really isn't tied to json). But maybe I am missing some
greater context/understanding (see other emails).
[1] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jsonschema
Sent from my really tiny device...
On Dec 6,
On 2013-12-06 18:58:36 +0200 (+0200), Monty Taylor wrote:
[...]
Anywho - gate selection will now be tied to the projects.txt file in
openstack/requirements. Essentially, if you receive automatic
requirements sync commits, your commits will be tested with the mirror.
If you are tied to the
Hi,
I am really inspired by this thread. Frankly saying, Glance for Murano was
a kind of sacred entity, as it is a service with a long history in
OpenStack. We even did not think in the direction of changing Glance.
Spending a night with these ideas, I am kind of having a dream about
unified
Dear All,
The consensus in comments to both patches seems to be that the
decision to clone an image based on disk format should be made in each
driver, instead of being imposed on all drivers by the flow. Edward
has updated his patch to follow the same logic as my patch, and I have
updated my
a) Because we're essentially doing a tear-down and re-build of the
whole architecture (a lot of the concepts in tuskar
will simply disappear), it's difficult to do small incremental patches
that support existing functionality. Is it okay
to have patches that break functionality? Are there good
On 11/18/2013 04:44 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 11:29 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:
IIRC, one of the concerns when oslo.messaging was split out was
maintaining support for existing deployments with configuration files that
worked with oslo.rpc. We had said that we would use
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2013-12-05 21:32:54 -0800:
On 12/05/2013 04:25 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Andrew Plunk's message of 2013-12-05 12:42:49 -0800:
Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2013-12-05 09:05:44 -0800:
On Dec 5, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Clint Byrum clint at
On Dec 6, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov
gokrokvertsk...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi,
I am really inspired by this thread. Frankly saying, Glance for Murano was a
kind of sacred entity, as it is a service with a long history in OpenStack.
We even did not think in the direction of
On 12/02/2013 02:06 PM, Eric Windisch wrote:
What more is needed from the blueprint or the patch authors to proceed?
I finally got back to looking at this. Here is how I would like to
proceed with GCE.
1) Stackforge
It seems like this code is pretty self contained. I'd like to see it
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Jamie Lennox jamielen...@redhat.comwrote:
To most of your questions i don't know the answer as the format was in
place before i started with the project. I know that it is similar (though
not exactly the same) as nova's but not where they are documented (as
On Dec 6, 2013, at 10:38 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2013-12-05 21:32:54 -0800:
On 12/05/2013 04:25 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Andrew Plunk's message of 2013-12-05 12:42:49 -0800:
Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2013-12-05
On 12/06/2013 12:26 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2013-12-03 23:12:39 -0800:
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over
time, and new folk who have been reviewing
As a Murano team we will be happy to contribute to Glance. Our Murano
metadata repository is a standalone component (with its own git
repository)which is not tightly coupled with Murano itself. We can easily
add our functionality to Glance as a new component\subproject.
Thanks
Georgy
On Fri,
Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2013-12-04 14:19:44 -0800:
So - what about us capturing this information outside the image: we
can create a uuid for the build, and write a file in the image with
that uuid, and outside the image we can write:
- all variables (no security
b) In the past, we allowed parallel development of the UI and API by
having well-documented expectations of what the API
Are these expectations documented yet? I'm new to the project and still
finding my way around. I've seen the wireframes and am going through
Chen's icehouse
Hello all,
We would like to push further the discussion on unified guest agent. You
may find the details of our proposal at [1].
Also let me clarify why we started this conversation. Savanna currently
utilizes SSH to install/configure Hadoop on VMs. We were happy with that
approach until
Excerpts from Tzu-Mainn Chen's message of 2013-12-06 07:37:20 -0800:
Hey all,
We're starting to work on the UI for tuskar based on Jarda's wireframes, and
as we're doing so, we're realizing that
we're not quite sure what development methodology is appropriate. Some
questions:
a)
Disclaimer: I'm very new to the project, so apologies if some of my
questions have been already answered or flat out don't make sense.
As I proofread, some of my comments may drift a bit past basic
requirements, so feel free to tell me to take certain questions out of
this thread into
On 12/06/2013 03:45 PM, Dmitry Mescheryakov wrote:
Hello all,
We would like to push further the discussion on unified guest agent. You
may find the details of our proposal at [1].
Also let me clarify why we started this conversation. Savanna currently
utilizes SSH to install/configure
In addition, here are several related links:
etherpad with some collected requirements:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/UnifiedAgents
initial thread about unified agents:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-November/thread.html#18276
Thanks.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:45
Thanks for the comments! Responses inline:
Disclaimer: I'm very new to the project, so apologies if some of my
questions have been already answered or flat out don't make sense.
As I proofread, some of my comments may drift a bit past basic
requirements, so feel free to tell me to take
Another idea that I'll put up for consideration (since I work with the
cloud-init codebase also).
Cloud-init[1] which currently does lots of little useful initialization
types of activities (similar to the racker agents activities) has been
going through some of the same questions[2] as to should
That's an interesting idea to use cloud-init, but it looks like such agent
will be unable to provide feedback like results of running commands.
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Joshua Harlow harlo...@yahoo-inc.comwrote:
Another idea that I'll put up for consideration (since I work with the
Hi, stackers:
Randy Tuttle created two blueprints as an augment to Sean’s proposal to improve
IPv6 readiness. You can find the details here:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/dnsmasq-bind-into-qrouter-namespace
On Dec 5, 2013, at 9:31 PM, Tzu-Mainn Chen tzuma...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey all,
I've attempted to spin out the requirements behind Jarda's excellent
wireframes
(http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-December/020944.html).
Hopefully this can add some perspective on both
Hi,
We are implementing Nova v3 API validation with jsonschema.
The schemas of API parameters are defined under
nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/v3/.
I guess the shemas would be used for checking the difference between
doc and Nova v3 API
parameters as another approach.
example:
Hi Adalberto,
2013/12/7 Adalberto Medeiros adal...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
Hi!
In the QA meeting yesterday, we decide to create a blueprint specific for
the negative tests in a separate file:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/negative-test-files and use
it to track the patches.
On 12/06/2013 03:57 PM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
Hi,
We are implementing Nova v3 API validation with jsonschema.
The schemas of API parameters are defined under
nova/api/openstack/compute/schemas/v3/.
I guess the shemas would be used for checking the difference between
doc and Nova v3 API
Another option is this:
https://github.com/cloudbase/cloudbase-init
It is python based on windows rather then .NET.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Sandy Walsh [sandy.wa...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 12:12 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Hello, Sean.
I get the issue with upgrade path. User doesn't want to update config
unless one is forced to do so.
But introducing code that weakens security and let it stay is an
unconditionally bad idea.
It looks like we have to weigh two evils: having troubles upgrading and
lessening security.
Joe,
Looks like we may be a bit more stable now?
Short URL: http://bit.ly/18qq4q2
Long URL :
On 2013-12-06 12:19, Jay Dobies wrote:
a) Because we're essentially doing a tear-down and re-build of the
whole architecture (a lot of the concepts in tuskar
will simply disappear), it's difficult to do small incremental
patches
that support existing functionality. Is it okay
to have patches
As part of the discussion around managing IPv6-addressed hosts both within
neutron itself and other systems that require address information, Sean
Collins and I had had a discussion about the types of addresses that could
be supported. Since IPv6 has many modes of provisioning, we will need to
On 2013-12-06 15:14, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
Hello, Sean.
I get the issue with upgrade path. User doesn't want to update config unless
one is forced to do so.
But introducing code that weakens security and let it stay is an
unconditionally bad idea.
It looks like we have to weigh
That looks really good, thanks for putting that together!
I'm going to put together a wiki page that consolidates the various Tuskar
planning documents - requirements, user stories, wireframes, etc - so it's
easier to see the whole planning picture.
Mainn
- Original Message -
On Dec
It's great that tempest tests for ironic have been submitted! I was
reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/48109/ and noticed that the
tests do not actually run. They are skipped because baremetal is not
enabled. This is not terribly surprising but we have had a policy in
tempest to only
The relevant wiki page is here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO/Tuskar#Icehouse_Planning
- Original Message -
That looks really good, thanks for putting that together!
I'm going to put together a wiki page that consolidates the various Tuskar
planning documents -
Hi,
For Neutron, I'm creating a module (one of several eventually) as part of a new
blueprint I'm working on, and the associated unit test module. I'm in really
early development, and just running this UT module as a standalone script
(rather than through tox). It allows me to do TDD pretty
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:53 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
It's great that tempest tests for ironic have been submitted! I was
reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/48109/ and noticed that the tests
do not actually run. They are skipped because baremetal is not enabled. This
is
I agree with what seems to also be the general consensus, that Glance can
become Heater+Glance (the service that manages images in OS today).
Clearly, if someone looks at the Glance DB schema, APIs and service type
(as returned by keystone service-list), all of the terminology is about
images, so
Excerpts from Ben Nemec's message of 2013-12-06 13:38:16 -0800:
On 2013-12-06 15:14, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
Hello, Sean.
I get the issue with upgrade path. User doesn't want to update config
unless one is forced to do so.
But introducing code that weakens security and let it
I hope I'm not re-opening worm cans here, and that's not my intent, but I just
wanted to get a little clarification in-line below:
On Dec 6, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Tim Schnell tim.schn...@rackspace.com
wrote:
To resolve this thread, I have created 5 blueprints based on this mailing
list
I too have warmed to this idea but wonder about the actual implementation
around it. While I like where Edmund is going with this, I wonder if it
wouldn't be valuable in the short-to-mid-term (I/J) to just add /templates to
Glance (/assemblies, /applications, etc) along side /images.
On 2013-12-06 16:30, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Ben Nemec's message of 2013-12-06 13:38:16 -0800:
On 2013-12-06 15:14, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
Hello, Sean.
I get the issue with upgrade path. User doesn't want to update config unless
one is forced to do so.
But introducing code that
I thought about that, i.e. first step in implementation just adding
templates, but like you said, you might end up duplicating 5 of the 7
tables in the Glance database, for every new asset type (image, template,
etc). Then you would do a similar thing for the endpoints. So, I'm not sure
what's a
On Dec 6, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com
wrote:
Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2013-12-06 14:43:05 -0800:
I too have warmed to this idea but wonder about the actual implementation
around it. While I like where Edmund is going with this, I wonder if it
wouldn't be
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Randall Burt randall.b...@rackspace.comwrote:
I too have warmed to this idea but wonder about the actual implementation
around it. While I like where Edmund is going with this, I wonder if it
wouldn't be valuable in the short-to-mid-term (I/J) to just add
That is great. How this work will be coordinated? I just want to be sure
that all assets are covered.
Thanks
Georgy
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Randall Burt randall.b...@rackspace.comwrote:
On Dec 6, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com
wrote:
Excerpts from Randall Burt's
Let me know if I can be of assistance in the visual design of this.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
