Thank you shihanzhang!,
I can't believe I didn't realize the ipset part spec was accepted I live
on my own bubble... I will be reviewing and testing/helping on that part
too during the next few days, I was too concentrated in the RPC part.
Best regards,
- Original Message -
hi
On 08/21/2014 07:50 AM, Osanai, Hisashi wrote:
Folks,
I wrote the following BP regarding repackaging ceilometer and ceilometerclient.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/repackaging-ceilometerclient
I need to install the ceilometer package when the swift_middlware middleware
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com
wrote:
Some comments inline.
Salvatore
On 20 August 2014 17:38, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi all,
I've read the proposal for incubator as described
Hi Michael!
Just to give others some background on this: The current proposal (by me)
is to have each Listener object, (as defined in the Neutron LBaaS v2 code
base) correspond with one haproxy process on the Octavia VM in the
currently proposed Octavia design document. Michael's proposal is to
On 08/20/2014 09:54 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2014-08-20 14:53:22 -0700:
On 08/20/2014 05:06 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/20/2014 07:21 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Thierry, thanks for the reply. Comments inline. :)
On 08/20/2014 06:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Thank you for your quick response.
On Thursday, August 21, 2014 3:12 PM, Nejc Saje wrote:
I don't think there's any way the modules you mention in the BP can be
moved into ceilometerclient. I think the best approach to resolve this
would be to rewrite swift middleware to use oslo.messaging
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 05:03:51 PM Clark Boylan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014, at 01:59 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 17/08/14 02:09, Angus Lees wrote:
On 16 Aug 2014 06:09, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com
Dear Friends, Have an doubt, please clarify me .!! When i start
understanding openstack , There are three nodes a) controller node
b)Compute node c) Network node
i) as my understanding controller node contains all the components like
nova,neutron cinder,glance,swift,Horizon etc
ii) Compute node
I'm not sure if this is possible with a Zuul setup, but once we identify a
failure causing commit, we change the reported job status to (skipped)
for any patches that contain the commit but not the fix. It's a relatively
straightforward way to communicate that the CI system is still operational
Why pymysql over mysql-python?
Endre Karlson
21. Aug. 2014 09:05 skrev Angus Lees g...@inodes.org følgende:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 05:03:51 PM Clark Boylan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014, at 01:59 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 17/08/14
Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
During last Atlanta summit there were couple discussions about
Application Catalog and Application space projects in OpenStack. These
cross-project discussions occurred as a result of Murano incubation
request [1] during Icehouse cycle. On the TC meeting devoted
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Nejc Saje wrote:
More riffing: we are moving away from per-sample specific data with Gnocchi.
I don't think we should store this per-sample, since the user doesn't
actually care about which agent the sample came from. The user cares about
which *resource* it came from.
One of the outcomes from Juno will be horizontal scalability in the
central agent and alarm evaluator via partitioning[1]. The compute
agent will get the same capability if you choose to use it, but it
doesn't make quite as much sense.
I haven't investigated the alarm evaluator side
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 11/08/14 05:24, Thierry Carrez wrote:
This all has created a world where you need to be*in* OpenStack to
matter, or to justify the investment. This has created a world where
everything and everyone wants to be in the OpenStack integrated
release. This has created more
On Wed, Aug 20 2014, Chris Dent wrote:
a) Am I right that no indicator is there?
Yes.
b) Assuming there should be one:
* Where should it go? Presumably it needs to be an attribute of
each sample because as agents leave and join the group, where
samples are published from can
On Wed, Aug 20 2014, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
This may be slightly off-topic but it is worth mentioning that the use of
threading.Lock[1]
which was included to make the locks thread safe seems to be leading to a
deadlock in eventlet[2].
It seems like we have rewritten this too many times
Hello,
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1316621
Is there someone has a solution for that bug?
--
Best
Li Tianqing___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Hi,
Since a few weeks I am trying to get a hold on Congress code base and
understand the flow.
Here is a brief summary what I am trying out:
Prepared a dummy client to send the policy strings to congress_server
listening at the path /policies. This is now changed to v1/policies. I
am using POST
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 20/08/14 18:28, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Some comments inline.
Salvatore
On 20 August 2014 17:38, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com
mailto:ihrac...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've read the proposal for incubator as described at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 21/08/14 08:33, loy wolfe wrote:
It's also unfair that core team reviewers are forced to spend
time on 3rd plugins and drivers under existing process. There are
so many 3rd networking backend technologies, from hardware to
controller, anyone
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 21/08/14 02:03, Clark Boylan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014, at 01:59 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: On
17/08/14 02:09, Angus Lees wrote:
On 16 Aug 2014 06:09, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com
mailto:d...@doughellmann.com wrote:
On Aug
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 21/08/14 09:42, Endre Karlson wrote:
Why pymysql over mysql-python?
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/juno/enable-mysql-connector.html#problem-description
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22
Tim Bell wrote:
Michael has been posting very informative blogs on the summary of the
mid-cycle meetups for Nova. The one on the Nova Network to Neutron
migration was of particular interest to me as it raises a number of
potential impacts for the CERN production cloud. The blog itself is at
On 08/20/2014 07:35 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Excerpts from Derek Higgins's message of 2014-08-20 09:06:48 +:
On 19/08/14 20:58, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Excerpts from Giulio Fidente's message of 2014-08-19 12:07:53 +:
One last comment, maybe a bit OT but I'm raising it here to see what
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 03:17:40PM +, Tim Bell wrote:
Michael has been posting very informative blogs on the summary of
the mid-cycle meetups for Nova. The one on the Nova Network to
Neutron migration was of particular interest to me as it raises a
number of potential impacts for the CERN
Jay Pipes wrote:
I don't believe the Programs are needed, as they are currently
structured. I don't really believe they serve any good purposes, and
actually serve to solidify positions of power, slanted towards existing
power centers, which is antithetical to a meritocratic community.
Let me
On 08/20/2014 02:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/20/2014 11:41 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 19/08/14 10:37, Jay Pipes wrote:
By graduating an incubated project into the integrated release, the
Technical Committee is blessing the project as the OpenStack way to do
some thing. If there are projects
Nice job! That's awesome.
Thanks,
Édouard.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com wrote:
Thank you shihanzhang!,
I can't believe I didn't realize the ipset part spec was accepted I live
on my own bubble... I will be reviewing and testing/helping on
Tagged with '[nova]' but this might be relevant data / idea for other
teams too.
With my code contributor hat on, one of the things that I find most the
frustrating about Nova code review process is that a patch can get a +2
vote from one core team member and then sit around for days, weeks, even
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Sean Dague wrote:
By blessing one team what we're saying is all the good ideas pool for
tackling this hard problem can only come from that one team.
This is a big part of this conversation that really confuses me. Who is
that one team?
I don't think it is that team that
FWIW, this is one of my normal morning practices, and the reason that
that query is part of most of the gerrit dashboards -
https://github.com/stackforge/gerrit-dash-creator/blob/master/dashboards/compute-program.dash
On 08/21/2014 06:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Tagged with '[nova]' but
That makes sense for setups that don’t use Zuul.
But for setups using Zuul/Jenkins, and for a vendor who is introducing a new
plugin which has initial hardware-enabling commits which haven’t been merged
yet, I don’t see how we can meet Neutron 3rd party testing requirements. The
requirements
On 21 Aug 2014, at 12:38, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Tim Bell wrote:
Michael has been posting very informative blogs on the summary of the
mid-cycle meetups for Nova. The one on the Nova Network to Neutron
migration was of particular interest to me as it raises a number of
On Aug 20, 2014, at 7:38 AM, Victor Sergeyev vserge...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hello Folks!
Oslo team is pleased to announce the new Oslo database handling library
release - oslo.db 0.4.0
Thanks all for contributions to this release.
Feel free to report issues using the launchpad tracker:
On Aug 20, 2014, at 2:43 PM, Pendergrass, Eric eric.pendergr...@hp.com wrote:
Hi Ryan,
We tried globally applying the hook but could not get execution to enter the
hook class.
Perhaps we made a mistake, but we concluded the Controller still had to
inherit from HookController using the
+1 to going back to file locks, too. We can keep the current scheme under a
different API in the module for anyone that wants to use it explicitly, but I
think at this point it’s better to have something that works reliably when
configured properly as the default.
I hope we can switch that to
On 08/20/2014 11:30 AM, Dougal Matthews wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Derek Higgins der...@redhat.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2014 10:15:51 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]
On 8/21/2014 7:09 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
FWIW, this is one of my normal morning practices, and the reason that
that query is part of most of the gerrit dashboards -
https://github.com/stackforge/gerrit-dash-creator/blob/master/dashboards/compute-program.dash
On 08/21/2014 06:57 AM, Daniel P.
On 08/21/2014 07:58 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Sean Dague wrote:
By blessing one team what we're saying is all the good ideas pool for
tackling this hard problem can only come from that one team.
This is a big part of this conversation that really confuses me. Who is
that one
Yesterday, doc builds started failing sporadically in Ceilometer gate.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 08:26:29AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/21/2014 7:09 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
FWIW, this is one of my normal morning practices, and the reason that
that query is part of most of the gerrit dashboards -
Le 21/08/2014 13:57, Daniel P. Berrange a écrit :
Tagged with '[nova]' but this might be relevant data / idea for other
teams too.
With my code contributor hat on, one of the things that I find most the
frustrating about Nova code review process is that a patch can get a +2
vote from one core
b) Assuming there should be one:
* Where should it go? Presumably it needs to be an attribute of
each sample because as agents leave and join the group, where
samples are published from can change.is this just for debugging
purposes or auditing? from an audit standpoint,
Fuelers,
Our upgrade tarball for 5.1 is more than 4.5Gb. We can reduce it size by
2Gb with lrzip tool (ticket
https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1356813, change
in build system https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114201/, change in docs
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115331/), but it will
What are other possible solutions to this issue?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Dmitry Pyzhov dpyz...@mirantis.com wrote:
Fuelers,
Our upgrade tarball for 5.1 is more than 4.5Gb. We can reduce it size by
2Gb with lrzip tool (ticket https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1356813,
change in
I have a very complex Openstack deployment for NFV. It could not be
deployed as Flat. It will have a lot of isolated private networks. Some
interfaces of a group VM instances will need bridged network with their
fixed IP addresses to communicate with outside world while other interfaces
from the
Hi,
I am quite new to the Congress and Openstack as well and this question may
seem very trivial and basic.
I am trying to figure out the policy enforcement logic,
Can some body help me understand how exactly, a policy enforcement action
is taken.
From the example policy there is an action
This is great work! Looking forward to seeing this get reviewed and
merged in Juno!
Kyle
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Édouard Thuleau thul...@gmail.com wrote:
Nice job! That's awesome.
Thanks,
Édouard.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
mangel...@redhat.com
On 08/20/2014 11:54 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2014-08-20 14:53:22 -0700:
On 08/20/2014 05:06 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/20/2014 07:21 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
...snip
We already run into issues with something as basic as competing SQL
databases.
If the TC
I see no other quick solutions in 5.1. We can find the difference in
packages between 5.0 and 5.0.2, put only updated packages in tarball and
get missed packages from existing repos on master node.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Mike Scherbakov mscherba...@mirantis.com
wrote:
What are other
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Mike Scherbakov mscherba...@mirantis.com
wrote:
Guillaume, do I understand right that without implementation of
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/ca-deployment, SSL support
will not be fully automated? And, consequently, we can not call it as
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 20/08/14 18:28, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
Some comments inline.
Salvatore
On 20 August 2014 17:38, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com
mailto:ihrac...@redhat.com
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote:
I definitely agree that reviewer time is wasted reviewing changes. However,
I don't think moving them to a different repo with different cores is going
to make them less brittle without some very strict guidelines about what
Hi,
Hmm.. I think ~15 minutes isn't long enough to skip this approach in production.
What about using lrzip only for end-users, but keep regular tarball
for CI and internal usage?
Thanks,
Igor
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Dmitry Pyzhov dpyz...@mirantis.com wrote:
I see no other quick
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 05:30:25AM -0400, Dougal Matthews wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Derek Higgins der...@redhat.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2014 10:15:51 AM
Subject:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 11/08/14 05:24, Thierry Carrez wrote:
This all has created a world where you need to be*in* OpenStack to
matter, or to justify the investment. This has created a world where
everything and
Hear, hear!
Dan
On 08/21/2014 07:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Tagged with '[nova]' but this might be relevant data / idea for other
teams too.
With my code contributor hat on, one of the things that I find most the
frustrating about Nova code review process is that a patch can get a +2
FYI, the context of this is that I would like to be able to test some of the
libvirt storage pool code against a live file system, as we currently test the
storage pool code. To do this, we need at least to be able to get a proper
connection to a session daemon. IMHO, since these calls aren't
On 08/20/2014 11:15 AM, Derek Higgins wrote:
I'll try to make the meeting regardless if its moved or not but an hour
later would certainly make it a little more palatable.
+1
--
Giulio Fidente
GPG KEY: 08D733BA
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
Edgar:
The status on the wiki page says Results are not accurate. Needs clarification
from Cisco.
Can you please tell me what we are missing?
-Dane
-Original Message-
From: Dane Leblanc (leblancd)
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:05 PM
To: 'Edgar Magana'; OpenStack Development Mailing
I know that Congress is still under development, but it is better that it
can provide some info for How to use it just like docker
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Docker , this might attract more people
contributing to it.
2014-08-21 22:07 GMT+08:00 Madhu Mohan mmo...@mvista.com:
Hi,
I am
Hello,
Sorry if I am not on the right mailing list. I would like to get some
information.
I would like to know if I am a company who wants to add a feature on an
openstack module. How do we have to proceed ? And so, what is the way this new
feature be adopted by the community.
The
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 10:52:42AM -0400, Solly Ross wrote:
FYI, the context of this is that I would like to be able to test some
of the libvirt storage pool code against a live file system, as we
currently test the storage pool code. To do this, we need at least to
be able to get a proper
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:00:59PM +0200, thomas.pessi...@orange.com wrote:
Hello,
Sorry if I am not on the right mailing list. I would like to get some
information.
I would like to know if I am a company who wants to add a feature on
an openstack module. How do we have to proceed ? And
There is already a blueprint tracing KVM host maintain:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/host-maintenance , but I think
that nova will not handle the case of auto live migration for maintenance
host, this should be a use case of Congress:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Congress
Hi,
last week I started discussing an extension to the existing neutron
openvswitch agent to support network adapters that are not in
promiscuous mode. Now I would like to enhance the round to get feedback
from a broader audience via the mailing list.
The Problem
When driving vlan or flat
If you look at review page for any of our Neutron commits, e.g.:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115025/
You'll see that there is a handy summary of CI results (with links to logs) in
the upper right. However, there are some CIs which are missing from this
summary, although we know that they
2. For stable branches, the process is a bit different. For those
branches, we don't generally want to introduce changes that are not
related to specific issues in a project. So in case of backports, we
tend to do per-patch consideration when synchronizing from incubator.
I'd call this
Hi Madhu,
For the alpha release (due soon), we’re focusing on just monitoring policy
violations—we’ve disabled all the enforcement code in master. (Though we never
actually hooked up the enforcement policy to the real world, so all Congress
has ever done is compute what actions to take to
Hi Jay,
We have a tutorial in review right now. It should be merged in a couple of
days. Thanks for the suggestion!
Tim
On Aug 21, 2014, at 7:54 AM, Jay Lau
jay.lau@gmail.commailto:jay.lau@gmail.com wrote:
I know that Congress is still under development, but it is better that it
Hi folks,
According to [1], we have ways to introduce external references to commit
messages.
These are useful to mark certain patches and their relevance in the context
of documentation, upgrades, etc.
I was wondering if it would be useful considering the addition of another
tag:
Hi Madhu,
We have an end-user tutorial in review right now. That should help you get
started understanding the end-to-end flow a bit better. Look for it to be
merged today or tomorrow.
Tim
On Aug 21, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Madhu Mohan
mmo...@mvista.commailto:mmo...@mvista.com wrote:
Hi,
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
This seems to mean different things to different people. There's a list
here which contains some criteria for new commits:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReviewChecklist.
There's also a treatise on git
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
A bit off topic, but I've never liked this message that gets added
as it think it sounds overly negative. It would better written
as
This
On 8/21/2014 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:14:33AM -0400, Solly Ross wrote:
(reply inline)
- Original Message -
From: Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
A bit off topic, but I've never liked this message that
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014, at 09:25 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/21/2014 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:14:33AM -0400, Solly Ross wrote:
(reply inline)
- Original Message -
From: Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
To: OpenStack
On 08/21/2014 12:34 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.com mailto:berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The
Hi,
I think 15 minutes is not too bad. Additionally, it will reduce download
time and price for bandwidth. It's worth to leave lrzip for customers, as
upgrade is one time operation so user can wait for a while. For development
it would be nice to have the fastest solution to boost development
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 21/08/14 18:34, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.com mailto:berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:34:48AM -0500, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off
On 08/21/2014 11:02 AM, Armando M. wrote:
Hi folks,
According to [1], we have ways to introduce external references to
commit messages.
These are useful to mark certain patches and their relevance in the
context of documentation, upgrades, etc.
I was wondering if it would be useful
On Aug 21, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Adam Young ayo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/21/2014 12:34 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:42:43PM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 08/21/2014 12:34 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
mailto:berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I
Comments inline below.
Best Regards,
Lance
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Adam Young ayo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/21/2014 12:21 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:40:59PM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 08/21/2014 12:21 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
A bit off topic, but I've never
Hi all,
We made the voice/IRC decision in the very format that favors voice. So
in the interest of putting the discussion to bed, voice your opinions here
in a non-voice way:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116042/
Thanks,
Doug
On 8/18/14, 3:06 PM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com
On 08/20/2014 02:38 PM, Victor Sergeyev wrote:
Hello Folks!
Oslo team is pleased to announce the new Oslo database handling library
release - oslo.db 0.4.0
Thanks all for contributions to this release.
Unfortunately this breaks manila. If I downgrade to oslo.db 0.3.0, it works.
On 21/08/14 12:21, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
A bit off topic, but I've never liked this message that gets added
as it think it sounds overly
Excerpts from Duncan Thomas's message of 2014-08-21 09:21:06 -0700:
On 21 August 2014 14:27, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
Specifically for Triple-O, by making the Deployment program == Triple-O, the
TC has picked the disk-image-based deployment of an undercloud design as The
On 20/08/14 15:37, Jay Pipes wrote:
For example, everyone agrees that Ceilometer has
room for improvement, but any implication that the Ceilometer is not
interested in or driving towards those improvements (because of NIH or
whatever) is, as has been pointed out, grossly unfair to the Ceilometer
On 8/21/2014 11:37 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014, at 09:25 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/21/2014 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:14:33AM -0400, Solly Ross wrote:
(reply inline)
- Original Message -
From: Daniel P. Berrange
On 08/21/2014 12:53 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:34:48AM -0500, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:12:16PM -0400, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 21/08/14 12:21, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:05:04PM +0100, Matthew Booth wrote:
I would prefer that you didn't merge this.
i.e. The project is better off without it.
A bit off topic, but I've never
On 08/21/2014 10:14 AM, Doug Wiegley wrote:
We made the voice/IRC decision in the very format that favors voice. So
in the interest of putting the discussion to bed, voice your opinions here
in a non-voice way:
I was about to voice (ha!) my opinion there but I stopped because I
don't think we
On 8/21/2014 12:26 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:23:12PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/21/2014 11:37 AM, Clark Boylan wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014, at 09:25 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 8/21/2014 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014
A concern with this approach is it's pretty arbitrary, and not always
clear which bugs are being addressed and how severe they are.
Well, establishing whether LP reports are actual bugs and assigning the
severity isn't what triaging is for?
An idea that came up in the Infra/QA meetup was
On 08/21/2014 08:00 AM, thomas.pessi...@orange.com wrote:
Sorry if I am not on the right mailing list. I would like to get some
information.
No problem, this is the correct mailing list as this message is about
discussing the future of an openstack component.
I would like to know if I am a
On Aug 21, 2014, at 8:30 AM, Nejc Saje ns...@redhat.com wrote:
Yesterday, doc builds started failing sporadically in Ceilometer gate.
The point I've been making is
that by the TC continuing to bless only the Ceilometer project as the
OpenStack Way of Metering, I think we do a disservice to our users by
picking a winner in a space that is clearly still unsettled.
can we avoid using the word 'blessed' -- it's extremely
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
