Sumit
Thanks for initiating this and also good discussion today on the IRC.
My thoughts are that it is important to make this available to potential
users and customers as soon as possible so that we can get the necessary
feedback. Considering that the neutron cores and community are battling
I agree. Also, as this does not preclude using the incubator when it is
ready, this is a good way to start iterating on implementation in parallel
with those issues being addressed by the community.
In my view, the issues raised around the incubator were significant enough
(around packaging,
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for blueprint
libvirt-disk-discard-option.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112977/
approved spec:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/85556/
blueprint was approved, but its status was changed to Pending Approval
because of FF.
Le 05/09/2014 01:26, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but
not solve this problem).
The difference between Dan's proposal and
Le 05/09/2014 01:22, Michael Still a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
[Heavy snipping because of length]
The radical (?) solution to the nova core team bottleneck is thus to
follow this lead and split the nova virt drivers out into
I agree with Prasad here.
There remains lots of unknown about Neutron incubator and its workflow at
this point, and the idea of Neutron feature branch is at best in embryonic
stage. It seems like among the three options, the most well-defined one is
indeed through stackforge.
When and if the
Thanks Ajay
I corrected this earlier. But facing another problem. Will forward paste in
a while.
On Friday, September 5, 2014, Ajay Kalambur (akalambu) akala...@cisco.com
wrote:
Sorry there was typo in the patch should be @validation and not
@(validation
Please change that in vm_perf.py
Tl;dr - Neutron incubator is only a wiki page with many uncertainties. Use
StackForge to make progress and re-evaluate when the incubator exists.
I also agree that starting out in StackForge as a separate repo is a better
first step. In addition to the uncertainty around packaging and other
On 09/04/2014 07:08 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2014-09-04 06:01:45 -0700:
On 09/04/2014 02:14 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 03:08 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Greetings,
Last Tuesday the TC held the first graduation review for Zaqar. During
the
Eoghan Glynn wrote:
Am I missing some compelling advantage of moving all these emergent
project-specific meetups to the Friday?
One is that due to space limitations, we won't have nearly as many
pods as in Atlanta (more like half or a third of them). Without one
pod per program, the model
On 09/04/2014 07:42 PM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote:
Anyway, not enough to -1 it, but enough to at least say something.
.. but I do not want to get into the discussion about software testing
here, not the place really.
However, I do think it
Hi,
I am wondering if the solution I was trying to sketch with the spec
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96867/13; is not easier to implement
and manage then the steps highlated till n.2. Maybe, the spec is not
yet there and should be improved (I will abandon or move to Kilo as
Marek suggest) but
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:56:04PM -0500, Kyle Mestery wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
Proposal / solution
===
In the past Nova has spun out its volume layer to form the cinder
project. The Neutron project started as
Michael Still wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Steve Gordon sgor...@redhat.com wrote:
Did you have a specific goal/date in mind for when you might start to
finalize this list? I am guessing at least after the dust settles on J-3 and
possibly even the first RCs but just curious.
http://paste.openstack.org/show/106297/
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:12 PM, masoom alam masoom.a...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Ajay
I corrected this earlier. But facing another problem. Will forward paste
in a while.
On Friday, September 5, 2014, Ajay Kalambur (akalambu) akala...@cisco.com
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 10:44:17PM -0600, John Griffith wrote:
Just some thoughts and observations I've had regarding this topic in Cinder
the past couple of years. I realize this is a Nova thread so hopefully
some of this can be applied in a more general context.
TLDR:
1. I think moving
Tim Bell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org]
Sent: 04 September 2014 16:59
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Comments on the concerns arose during
the TC meeting
Sean Dague wrote:
[...]
So,
Please forward ur vmtasks.py file
On Friday, September 5, 2014, masoom alam masoom.a...@gmail.com wrote:
http://paste.openstack.org/show/106297/
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:12 PM, masoom alam masoom.a...@gmail.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','masoom.a...@gmail.com'); wrote:
Thanks Ajay
I
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:57:57PM -0700, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
Proposal / solution
===
In the past Nova has spun out its volume layer to form the cinder
project. The Neutron project started as an
Carl,
Seem so. I think internal router interface and external gateway port
GARP are taken care by keepalived during failover. And if HA is not
enable, _send_gratuitous_arp is called to send out GARP.
I think we will need to take care IPv6 for both cases since keepalived
1.2.0 support IPv6.
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 06:48:33PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 09/04/2014 06:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Position statement
==
Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that
Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If
On 09/04/2014 09:44 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Thanks for your comments Gordon. I appreciate where you are coming from
and I think we are actually in agreement on a lot of things.
I just want to make it clear that from the very beginning of the project
the team has tried to communicate (but
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
- A fairly significant amount of nova code would need to be
considered semi-stable API. Certainly everything under nova/virt
and any object which is passed in/out of the virt driver API.
Changes to such
Hi folks,
Is there anybody working on this?
In most of our cloud environments, business networks are isolated from
management network. So, we are thinking about making *an agent in guest machine
to send metrics to compute node using virtual serial port*. And then, compute
node could send
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:57:57 -0700
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
Overall I do think we need to re-think how the review burden is
distributed. That being said, this is a nice proposal but I am not
sure if it moves the review burden around enough or is the right
approach. Do you have
Hi everyone,
We just hit feature freeze[1], so please do not approve changes that add
features or new configuration options unless those have been granted a
feature freeze exception.
This is also string freeze[2], so you should avoid changing translatable
strings. If you have to modify a
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:54:28PM -0700, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
Thanks Daniel for taking the time to write such deep message. Obviously
you have thought about this issue for a long time and your opinion comes
from deep personal understanding. I'm adding tags for neutron and
cinder, as I know
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:31:50PM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
- A fairly significant amount of nova code would need to be
considered semi-stable API. Certainly everything under nova/virt
and any
Greetings!
I think I found a problem in extra attributes handling in LDAP backend.
Also I'd like to propose a solution :)
There is a bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1336769
LDAP additional attribute mappings do not care about model attribute
reported by Marcos Lobo
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 03:56:34PM +1000, Angus Salkeld wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Gauvain Pocentek
gauvain.pocen...@objectif-libre.com wrote:
Hi,
A bit of background: I'm working on the publication of the HOT resources
reference on docs.openstack.org.
On 4 September 2014 23:48, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 06:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Position statement
==
Over the past year I've increasingly come to the conclusion that
Nova is heading for (or probably already at) a major crisis. If
steps
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 06:22:18PM -0500, Michael Still wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
[Heavy snipping because of length]
The radical (?) solution to the nova core team bottleneck is thus to
follow this lead and split the nova virt
On 5 September 2014 00:26, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but
not solve this problem).
The difference
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:29:43AM +0100, John Garbutt wrote:
On 4 September 2014 23:48, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 06:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
If we ignored gerrit for a moment, is rapid increase in splitting out
components the ideal workflow? Would we
On 09/05/2014 06:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:31:50PM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
- A fairly significant amount of nova code would need to be
considered semi-stable API.
On 09/04/2014 10:25 PM, Solly Ross wrote:
Anyway, I think it would be useful to have some sort of page where people
could say I'm an SME in X, ask me for reviews and then patch submitters
could go
and say, oh, I need an someone to review my patch about storage backends,
let me
ask sross.
given the code size, a BP may be a over stretch. I'd just file a review + bug
-- dims
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Zang MingJie zealot0...@gmail.com wrote:
does it require bp or bug report to submit oslo.concurrency patch ?
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Davanum Srinivas
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:00:44AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:31:50PM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
- A fairly significant amount
Patches re-approved.
Thanks,
John
On 5 September 2014 00:24, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
Approved.
Michael
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-09-04 20:34 GMT+09:00 Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I'd like to request a
Yeah, I have been reviewing these, so happy to sponsor them too.
Patches have been re-approved.
Thanks,
John
On 5 September 2014 00:23, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
So, that's your three. This exception is approved.
Michael
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Nikola Đipanov
On 5 September 2014 23:33, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
I think realistically a self certification process that would have
artifacts in a discoverable place. I was thinking something along the
lines of a baseball card interface with a short description of the
project, a list of the
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:12:37AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:40 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
A handy example of this I can think of is the currently granted FFE for
serial consoles - consider how much of the code went into the common
part vs. the libvirt specific part, I would
Hi,
We have now tagged juno-3, so we are good to approve patches for FFE now.
Given how much there is to get through the gate, it would be nice to
concentrate on FFE code, and higher priority bugs, till we break the
back of those merges.
Thanks,
John
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:28:55AM +, Bohai (ricky) wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for blueprint
libvirt-disk-discard-option.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112977/
approved spec:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/85556/
blueprint was approved, but its
Blueprint re-approved, code re-approved.
Thanks,
John
On 4 September 2014 21:11, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
I'll be the third core here. Approved.
@John: can you please remove your -2 from this one?
Michael
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On
In the nova-meeting we agreed this gets a FFE, based on previous
agreements in nova-meetings.
Blueprint is approved for juno-rc1.
Thanks,
John
On 4 September 2014 16:38, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 05:16 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
The main sr-iov patches have gone
On 09/05/2014 07:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:00:44AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:31:50PM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:19:45PM +, Coffman, Joel M. wrote:
A major concern about several encryption features within Nova [1, 2] has been
the lack of secure key management. To address this concern, work has been
underway to integrate these features with Barbican [3], which can be used
On 09/05/2014 07:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:12:37AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:40 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
A handy example of this I can think of is the currently granted FFE for
serial consoles - consider how much of the code went into the
On 09/05/2014 07:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:28:55AM +, Bohai (ricky) wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for blueprint
libvirt-disk-discard-option.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112977/
approved spec:
On 09/05/2014 07:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:28:55AM +, Bohai (ricky) wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for blueprint
libvirt-disk-discard-option.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112977/
approved spec:
On 09/04/2014 09:44 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Does a Qpid/Rabbit/Kafka provisioning service make sense? Probably.
I think something like that would be valuable, especially in conjunction
with some application layer proxying and mapping between 'virtual'
addresses/endpoints and specific
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:49:04AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 07:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:00:44AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:31:50PM +0930, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On
On 09/05/2014 07:51 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:19:45PM +, Coffman, Joel M. wrote:
A major concern about several encryption features within Nova [1, 2] has
been the lack of secure key management. To address this concern, work has
been underway to integrate
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
For a long time I've use the LKML 'subsystem maintainers' model as the
reference point for ideas. In a more LKML like model, each virt team
(or other subsystem team) would have their own separate GIT repo with
a complete Nova codebase, where they did they day to day
Now that the project is incubated, we should be moving our docs from the
openstack wiki to the openstack-manuals project. Rushil Chugh has volunteered
to lead this effort so please coordinate any updates to documentation with him
(and me). Our goal is to have the updates to openstack-manuals
Michael Still wrote:
We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent
email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a freeze
exception:
* your code must already be up for review
* your blueprint must have an approved spec
* you need three (3)
On 09/05/2014 02:59 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 01:26, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side effect of our effort to split out the scheduler will help but
not solve this problem).
On 09/05/2014 08:11 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/05/2014 07:51 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:19:45PM +, Coffman, Joel M. wrote:
A major concern about several encryption features within Nova [1, 2] has
been the lack of secure key management. To address this
Le 05/09/2014 13:05, Nikola Đipanov a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:25 PM, Solly Ross wrote:
Anyway, I think it would be useful to have some sort of page where people
could say I'm an SME in X, ask me for reviews and then patch submitters could
go
and say, oh, I need an someone to review my patch
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:59:07PM -0400, Solly Ross wrote:
I would like to request a feature freeze exception for the Websocket Proxy to
Host Security.
The spec [1] was approved for Nova, and the patches [2] are currently sitting
there with one
+2 (courtesy of @danpb), with a +1 from
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a FFE for the 3 patchsets that implement quotas for server
groups.
Server groups (which landed in Icehouse) provides a really useful anti-affinity
filter for scheduling that a lot of customers woudl like to use, but without
some form of quota control to limit the
On 09/04/2014 07:54 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:08:09 +0900
Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for v2.1 API patches.
This request is different from Christopher's one.
His request is for the approved patches, but this is
for
Le 05/09/2014 14:48, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/05/2014 02:59 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 01:26, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side effect of our effort to split out the
Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor their own FFEs so that's 3.
N.
[1]
Le 05/09/2014 12:48, Sean Dague a écrit :
On 09/05/2014 03:02 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 01:22, Michael Still a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
berra...@redhat.com wrote:
[Heavy snipping because of length]
The radical (?) solution to the nova core
On 09/04/2014 01:14 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
https://dague.net/2014/08/26/openstack-as-layers/
Just wanted to say that I found this article very useful indeed and
agree with the points you make in it.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
On 09/05/2014 08:58 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 14:48, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/05/2014 02:59 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 01:26, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel is saying (note that, as mentioned, a
side
-Original Message-
From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net]
Sent: 05 September 2014 11:49
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Averting the Nova crisis by splitting out
virt drivers
On 09/05/2014 03:02 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Ahem,
On Sep 3, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Ken Giusti kgiu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I'm proposing a freeze exception for the oslo.messaging AMQP 1.0
driver:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75815/
Blueprint:
Hi Ben,
Since manila just entered incubation, the openstack-manuals repo and common
documentation will not include it until it is integrated. During incubation
we ask you to start documentation in your own repo and identify what will
eventually move into common docs. See
While reviewing this zookeeper service group fix in Nova -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102639/ it was exposed that the
zookeeper tests aren't running in infra.
The crux of the issue is that zookeeper python modules are C extensions.
So you have to either install from packages (which we don't
2014-09-05 9:09 GMT-03:00 Sean Dague s...@dague.net:
On 09/05/2014 07:39 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 5 September 2014 23:33, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
I think realistically a self certification process that would have
artifacts in a discoverable place. I was thinking something
Le 05/09/2014 15:11, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/05/2014 08:58 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 14:48, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/05/2014 02:59 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/09/2014 01:26, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
Basically +1 with what Daniel
- Each virt driver project gets its own core team and is responsible
for dealing with review, merge release of their codebase.
Note, I really do mean *all* virt drivers should be separate. I do
not want to see some virt drivers split out and others remain in tree
because I feel that
Hey Devs,
I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94915/
This feature is the final patch set for the User Namespace BP
(https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/libvirt-lxc-user-namespaces). This
is an important feature for libvirt-lxc because
hey folks,
I am requesting an exception for the Swift trust authentication blueprint[1].
This blueprint addresses a security bug in Sahara and represents a significant
move towards increased security for Sahara clusters. There are several reviews
underway[2] with 1 or 2 more starting today or
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 01:49:20PM +, Andrew Melton wrote:
Hey Devs,
I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94915/
This feature is the final patch set for the User Namespace BP
+1 for ServerGroup quotas. It's been a while since this feature is
discussed and approved. As a public cloud provider we really want to get
ServerGroup into production. However, without quotas it is more harm than
gain. Since ServerGroup (and even its novaclient's command) is merged in
Icehouse,
On 09/05/2014 06:29 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
Scheduler: I think we need to split out the scheduler with a similar
level of urgency. We keep blocking features on the split, because we
know we don't have the review bandwidth to deal with them. Right now I
am talking about a compute related
On 3 September 2014 21:57, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey
The libvirt version_cap debacle continues to come up in conversation and
one perception of the whole thing appears to be:
A controversial patch
On 09/05/2014 04:49 AM, Marco Fargetta wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering if the solution I was trying to sketch with the spec
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96867/13; is not easier to implement
and manage then the steps highlated till n.2. Maybe, the spec is not
yet there and should be improved (I
Hi,
My name is Mykola Grygoriev and I'm engineer who currently working on
deploying 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver.
Following instructions on
http://ci.openstack.org/third_party.html#requesting-a-service-account
asking for adding gerrit CI account (coraid-ci) to the Voting Third-Party
CI
Hi all,
Between recent IRC meetings and the mid-cycle operators meetup, we've
heard things ranging from is the SDK project still around to I
can't wait for this. I'm Brian Curtin from Rackspace and I'd like to
tell you what the python-openstacksdk [0][1] project has been up to
lately.
After
On 09/05/2014 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
While reviewing this zookeeper service group fix in Nova -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102639/ it was exposed that the
zookeeper tests aren't running in infra.
The crux of the issue is that zookeeper python modules are C extensions.
So you have to
Hi Mykola,
On 09/05/2014 04:09 PM, Mykola Grygoriev wrote:
Hi,
My name is Mykola Grygoriev and I'm engineer who currently working on
deploying 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver.
Great, thanks!
Following instructions on
On 09/05/2014 04:21 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
While reviewing this zookeeper service group fix in Nova -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102639/ it was exposed that the
zookeeper tests aren't running in infra.
The crux of the issue is that zookeeper
You need to apply the other 2 network context patches from the reviews I sent
out
Ajay
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 5, 2014, at 2:25 AM, masoom alam
masoom.a...@gmail.commailto:masoom.a...@gmail.com wrote:
http://paste.openstack.org/show/106297/
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:12 PM, masoom alam
On 09/05/2014 10:33 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Hi Mykola,
On 09/05/2014 04:09 PM, Mykola Grygoriev wrote:
Hi,
My name is Mykola Grygoriev and I'm engineer who currently working on
deploying 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver.
Great, thanks!
Following instructions on
I'm willing to sponsor this
Chris
—
Sent from Mailbox
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a FFE for the 3 patchsets that implement quotas for
server groups.
Server groups (which landed in Icehouse) provides a really useful
+1 from me (Cinder core)
On 5 September 2014 15:09, Mykola Grygoriev mgrygor...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi,
My name is Mykola Grygoriev and I'm engineer who currently working on
deploying 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver.
Following instructions on
On 09/05/2014 09:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 01:49:20PM +, Andrew Melton wrote:
Hey Devs,
I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94915/
This feature is the final patch set for the User Namespace BP
On 09/05/2014 04:48 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Quick response as not to hijack the thread:
I think we all agree on the benefits of having resources you can turn
off and on at will.
I don't agree at all. There's no cost whatsoever in turning on a
resource. It doesn't need to be extensible.
Kyle,
Please consider an FFE for
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/ml2-hierarchical-port-binding.
This was discussed extensively at Wednesday's ML2 meeting, where the
consensus was that it would be valuable to get this into Juno if
possible. The patches have had core reviews
I agree with Flavio. This looks really cool, and I had a very similar idea
recently. I'll try to find some time to give this a whirl.
-Dave
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/05/2014 04:21 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 09/05/2014 06:32 AM, Sean Dague
Which of file system appliances are supported as of today? We are thinking
to integrate with our cloud.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I can only see the use of a separate project for Group Policy as a tactical
and temporary solution. In my opinion, it does not make sense to have the
Group Policy as a separate project outside Neutron (unless the new project
is aiming to replace Neutron and I do not think anybody is suggesting
Just an updated note here. The IPV6 sub-team has moved their meeting
time, so I've claimed #openstack-meeting at 1400UTC on Tuesday's for
the Neutron team meeting. I'll send a note reminding folks of the
change on Monday.
Thanks,
Kyle
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Kyle Mestery
I deployed a server having three drives using TripleO. How can I know which
disk is root disk? I need this information as I have a utility which will
format all drives except root disk. Utility is being used for some solution
we are developing using machines deployed by TripleO.
Regards,
Jyoti
I deployed a server having three drives using TripleO. How can I know which
disk is root disk? I need this information as I have a utility which will
format all drives except root disk. Utility is being used for some solution
we are developing using machines deployed by TripleO.
Regards,
Jyoti
1 - 100 of 182 matches
Mail list logo
