Re: [openstack-dev] [all][keystone][product] api keys/application specific passwords

On 05/16/2017 05:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 05/15/2017 10:00 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: On 16/05/17 13:29, Lance Bragstad wrote: On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Adrian Turjak > wrote: Based on the specs that are currently up

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] [Pile] Need Exemption On Submitted Spec for the Keystone

That sounds good - I'll review the spec before today's meeting [0]. Will someone be around to answer questions about the spec if there are any? [0] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Keystone_Team_Meeting On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Mh Raies wrote: > Hi Lance, > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][keystone][product] api keys/application specific passwords

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 05/16/2017 05:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 05/15/2017 10:00 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 16/05/17 13:29, Lance Bragstad wrote: >>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Adrian Turjak

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [keystone] - RFC cross project request id tracking

On Sun, 14 May 2017, Sean Dague wrote: So, the basic idea is, services will optionally take an inbound X-OpenStack-Request-ID which will be strongly validated to the format (req-$uuid). They will continue to always generate one as well. When the context is built (which is typically about 3

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Ironic-UI review requirements - single core reviews

On 05/15/2017 09:10 PM, Julia Kreger wrote: All, In our new reality, in order to maximize velocity, I propose that we loosen the review requirements for ironic-ui to allow faster iteration. To this end, I suggest we move ironic-ui to using a single core reviewer for code approval, along the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16/05/17 04:22 +, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: Flavio, Forgive the top post – outlook ftw. I understand the concerns raised in this thread. It is unclear if this thread is the feeling of two TC members or enough TC members care deeply about this issue to permanently limit OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest] Proposing Fanglei Zhu for Tempest core

+1! -- Masayuki Igawa masay...@igawa.me On Tue, May 16, 2017, at 05:22 PM, Andrea Frittoli wrote: > Hello team, > > I'm very pleased to propose Fanglei Zhu (zhufl) for Tempest core. > > Over the past two cycle Fanglei has been steadily contributing to > Tempest and its community.> She's

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Luigi Toscano's message of 2017-05-16 11:50:53 +0200: > On Monday, 15 May 2017 21:12:16 CEST Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-15 10:52:12 -0700: > > > > > On 15 May 2017 at 10:34, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > > I'm

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

I would like to bring up a subject that hasn't really been discussed in this thread yet, forgive me if I missed an email mentioning this. What I personally would like to see is a publishing infrastructure to allow pushing built images to an internal infra mirror/repo/registry for consumption of

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [keystone] - RFC cross project request id tracking

> The idea is that a regular user calling into a service should not > be able to set the request id, but outgoing calls from that service > to other services as part of the same request would. Yeah, so can anyone explain to me why this is a real problem? If a regular user wanted to be a d*ck and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 05/16/2017 11:17 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:38:34AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Folks, >> >> See $TITLE :) >> >> Thanks, >> Dims >> > > My preference would be to have an #openstack-tc channel. > > One thing I like about the dedicated meeting time was if I was

Re: [openstack-dev] [vitrage] [nova] VM Heartbeat / Healthcheck Monitoring

thanks for the pointers Sam. I took a quick look. I agree that the VM Heartbeat / Health-check looks like a good fit into Masakari. Currently your instance monitoring looks like it is strictly black-box type monitoring thru libvirt events. Is that correct ? i.e. you do not do any intrusive

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 06:20, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> >> Flavio Percoco wrote: >>> >>> From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided releasing >>> projects >>> in any kind of built form. This was also one of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 06:22, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-05-16 14:08:07 +0200: >> Flavio Percoco wrote: >> > From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided releasing >> > projects >> > in any kind of built form. This was

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On May 15, 2017, at 9:00 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > [huge snip] Thank you! We don’t need 50K of repeated text in every response. -- Ed Leafe __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Project updates - OpenStack Summit

If you missed the TripleO project updates presentation, feel free to watch the recording: https://www.openstack.org/videos/boston-2017/project-update-triple0 and the slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1knOesCs3HTqKvIl9iUZciUtE006ff9I3zhxCtbLZz4c If you have any question or feedback

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 08:12, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 06:52:12 -0700: >> On 16 May 2017 at 06:20, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> > On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> >> >> >> Flavio Percoco

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][keystone][product] api keys/application specific passwords

Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2017-05-16 15:16:08 +0100: > On Tue, 16 May 2017, Monty Taylor wrote: > > > FWIW - I'm un-crazy about the term API Key - but I'm gonna just roll with > > that until someone has a better idea. I'm uncrazy about it for two reasons: > > > > a) the word "key"

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [keystone] - RFC cross project request id tracking

On 05/16/2017 11:28 AM, Eric Fried wrote: >> The idea is that a regular user calling into a service should not >> be able to set the request id, but outgoing calls from that service >> to other services as part of the same request would. > > Yeah, so can anyone explain to me why this is a real

[openstack-dev] [nova] [devstack] [deployment] nova-api and meta-api under uwsgi

(This is a followup to http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/116267.html but I don't have that around anymore to make a proper response to.) In a devstack change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/457715/ nova-api and nova-metadata will be changed to run as WSGI

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Steve, We should not always ask "if this is a ruling from the TC", the default is that it's a discussion/exploration. If it is a "ruling", it won't be on a ML thread. Thanks, Dims On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Dims, > > The [tc] was in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Validations before upgrades and updates

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Steven Hardy wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 02:45:08PM +0300, Marios Andreou wrote: >>Hi folks, after some discussion locally with colleagues about improving >>the upgrades experience, one of the items that came up was pre-upgrade and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 05/16/2017 09:24 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Luigi Toscano's message of 2017-05-16 11:50:53 +0200: >> On Monday, 15 May 2017 21:12:16 CEST Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-15 10:52:12 -0700: >>> On 15 May 2017 at 10:34, Doug

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-05-15 21:50:23 -0400: > On 15/05/17 11:49 -0700, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: > >On 15 May 2017 at 11:19, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > >> Sorry for the top post, Michal, Can you please clarify a couple of things: > >> > >> 1) Can folks

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][keystone][product] api keys/application specific passwords

On Tue, 16 May 2017, Monty Taylor wrote: FWIW - I'm un-crazy about the term API Key - but I'm gonna just roll with that until someone has a better idea. I'm uncrazy about it for two reasons: a) the word "key" implies things to people that may or may not be true here. If we do stick with it -

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Heat template example repository

On 15.05.17 19:01, Zane Bitter wrote: On 15/05/17 12:10, Steven Hardy wrote: On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:46:28PM +0200, Lance Haig wrote: Hi Steve, I am happy to assist in any way to be honest. It was great to meet you in Boston, and thanks very much for volunteering to help out. BTW one

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 05/16/2017 09:38 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Folks, > > See $TITLE :) > > Thanks, > Dims I'd rather avoid #openstack-tc and just use #openstack-dev. #openstack-dev is pretty low used environment (compared to like #openstack-infra or #openstack-nova). I've personally been trying to make it

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Sam Yaple's message of 2017-05-16 14:11:18 +: > I would like to bring up a subject that hasn't really been discussed in > this thread yet, forgive me if I missed an email mentioning this. > > What I personally would like to see is a publishing infrastructure to allow > pushing

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Issue while applying customs configuration to overcloud.

Hi Steve, Thanks for your reply. Out of interest, where did you find OS::TripleO::ControllerServer, do we have a mistake in our docs somewhere? I referred below template. https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/blob/master/puppet/controller-role.yaml resources:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:38:34AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Folks, > > See $TITLE :) > > Thanks, > Dims > My preference would be to have an #openstack-tc channel. One thing I like about the dedicated meeting time was if I was not able to attend, or when I was just a casual observer,

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 02:08:07PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > I totally subscribe to the concerns around publishing binaries (under > any form), and the expectations in terms of security maintenance that it > would set on the publisher. At the same time, we need to have images > available,

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest] Proposing Fanglei Zhu for Tempest core

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:22:44AM +, Andrea Frittoli wrote: > Hello team, > > I'm very pleased to propose Fanglei Zhu (zhufl) for Tempest core. > > Over the past two cycle Fanglei has been steadily contributing to Tempest > and its community. > She's done a great deal of work in making

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 07:11, Sam Yaple wrote: > I would like to bring up a subject that hasn't really been discussed in this > thread yet, forgive me if I missed an email mentioning this. > > What I personally would like to see is a publishing infrastructure to allow > pushing built

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> 1/ Have third-parties publish images >> It is the current situation. The issue is that the Kolla team (and >> likely others) would rather automate the process and use OpenStack >> infrastructure for it. >> >> 2/ Have

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 06:52:12 -0700: > On 16 May 2017 at 06:20, Flavio Percoco wrote: > > On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> > >> Flavio Percoco wrote: > >>> > >>> From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-05-16 10:07:52 -0400: > On 16/05/17 09:45 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-05-15 21:50:23 -0400: > >> On 15/05/17 11:49 -0700, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: > >> >On 15 May 2017 at 11:19, Davanum Srinivas

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 08:30, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-05-16 10:07:52 -0400: >>> On 16/05/17 09:45 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> >Excerpts from Flavio

[openstack-dev] [magnum] after create cluster for kubernetes, kubect create command was failed.

Hello, Magnum team. I Installed Openstack newton and magnum. I installed Magnum by source(master branch). I have two questions. 1. After installation, I created kubernetes cluster and it's CREATE_COMPLETE, and I want to create kubernetes pod. My create script is below.

[openstack-dev] [User] Achieving Resiliency at Scales of 1000+

Team, We manage to have a productive discussion on resiliency for 1000+ nodes. Many thanks to Adam Spiers on helping with it. https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Achieving_Resiliency_at_Scales_of_1000+ There are several concrete actions especially for current gate testing. Will bring these at the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On May 16, 2017, at 3:06 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > >> It's pretty clear now some see drawbacks in reusing #openstack-dev, and >> so far the only benefit expressed (beyond not having to post the config >> change to make it happen) is that "everybody is already there". By that

[openstack-dev] OpenStack Bug Smash for Pike Release

Hi all, OpenStack Bug Smash for Pike is ongoing now. I will last from Wednesday to Friday May 17 to 19 in Suzhou, China. Around 60 engineers are working on Nova, Cinder, Neutron, Keystone, Heat, Telemetry, Ironic, Oslo, OSC, Kolla, Trove, Dragonflow, Karbor, Manila, Zaqar, Tricircle, Cloudkitty,

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][concurrency] lockutils lock fairness / starvation

So fyi, If you really want something like this: Just use: http://fasteners.readthedocs.io/en/latest/api/lock.html#fasteners.lock.ReaderWriterLock And always get a write lock. It is a slightly different way of getting those locks (via a context manager) but the implementation underneath is a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 09:40, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-15 10:52:12 -0700: >> > Container images introduce some extra complexity, over the basic >> > operating system style packages mentioned above. Due to the way >> > they are

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][oslo.messaging] Call to deprecate the 'pika' driver in the oslo.messaging project

Fine with me, I'd personally rather get down to say 2 'great' drivers for RPC, And say 1 (or 2?) for notifications. So ya, wfm. -Josh Mehdi Abaakouk wrote: +1 too, I haven't seen its contributors since a while. On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 09:42:00PM -0400, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 15/05/17

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: > On 16 May 2017 at 08:32, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-05-16 10:17:35 -0500: >>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:38:34AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 10:41, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-05-16 11:17:31 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Sam Yaple's message of 2017-05-16 14:11:18 +: > [...] >> > If you build images properly in infra, then you will have an image that is >> > not

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

So another consideration. Do you think whole rule of "not building binares" should be reconsidered? We are kind of new use case here. We aren't distro but we are packagers (kind of). I don't think putting us on equal footing as Red Hat, Canonical or other companies is correct here. K8s is

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [devstack] [deployment] nova-api and meta-api under uwsgi

On 5/16/2017 11:11 AM, Chris Dent wrote: (This is a followup to http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/116267.html but I don't have that around anymore to make a proper response to.) In a devstack change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/457715/ nova-api and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

Davanum Srinivas wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: >> On 16 May 2017 at 08:32, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-05-16 10:17:35 -0500: My preference would be to have an

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-15 10:52:12 -0700: > > Container images introduce some extra complexity, over the basic > > operating system style packages mentioned above. Due to the way > > they are constructed, they are likely to include content we don't > > produce

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 2017-05-16 11:46 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 05/16/2017 11:17 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:38:34AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Folks, See $TITLE :) Thanks, Dims My preference would be to have an #openstack-tc channel. One thing I like about the dedicated meeting

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [keystone] - RFC cross project request id tracking

On 14 May 2017, at 4:04, Sean Dague wrote: > One of the things that came up in a logging Forum session is how much effort > operators are having to put into reconstructing flows for things like server > boot when they go wrong, as every time we jump a service barrier the > request-id is

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 2017-05-16 11:17:31 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Sam Yaple's message of 2017-05-16 14:11:18 +: [...] > > If you build images properly in infra, then you will have an image that is > > not security checked (no gpg verification of packages) and completely > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 2017-05-16 09:38:34 -0400 (-0400), Davanum Srinivas wrote: > See $TITLE :) Trying not to rehash other points, I'm in favor of using #openstack-dev for now until we see it's not working out. Creating a new channel for this purpose before we've even undertaken the experiment seems like a social

Re: [openstack-dev] [networking-sfc] pep8 failing

Make sure you have the latest neutron-lib in your tree: neutron-lib==1.6.0 On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Vikash Kumar wrote: > Hi Team, > > pep8 is failing in master code. translation hint helpers are removed from > LOG messages. Is this purposefully done ?

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 09:46:19 -0700: > So another consideration. Do you think whole rule of "not building > binares" should be reconsidered? We are kind of new use case here. We > aren't distro but we are packagers (kind of). I don't think putting us > on equal

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 08:20:17 -0700: > On 16 May 2017 at 08:12, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 06:52:12 -0700: > >> On 16 May 2017 at 06:20, Flavio Percoco wrote: > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-05-16 17:41:28 +: > On 2017-05-16 11:17:31 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Sam Yaple's message of 2017-05-16 14:11:18 +: > [...] > > > If you build images properly in infra, then you will have an image that is > > > not

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 11:38:19 -0700: > On 16 May 2017 at 11:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 09:46:19 -0700: > >> So another consideration. Do you think whole rule of "not building > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 05/16/2017 02:39 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 09:51:00 -0700: >> On 16 May 2017 at 09:40, Clint Byrum wrote: >>> >>> What's at stake isn't so much "how do we get the bits to the users" but >>> "how do we only get bits to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: Flavio Percoco wrote: From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided releasing projects in any kind of built form. This was also one of the concerns I raised when working on the proposal to support other programming languages. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16/05/17 09:45 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2017-05-15 21:50:23 -0400: On 15/05/17 11:49 -0700, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: >On 15 May 2017 at 11:19, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Sorry for the top post, Michal, Can you please clarify a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 16 May 2017 at 07:49, Sean Dague wrote: > On 05/16/2017 09:38 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Folks, >> >> See $TITLE :) >> >> Thanks, >> Dims > > I'd rather avoid #openstack-tc and just use #openstack-dev. > #openstack-dev is pretty low used environment (compared to like >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2017-05-16 10:49:54 -0400: > On 05/16/2017 09:38 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > Folks, > > > > See $TITLE :) > > > > Thanks, > > Dims > > I'd rather avoid #openstack-tc and just use #openstack-dev. > #openstack-dev is pretty low used environment (compared

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Michał Jastrzębski wrote: > On 16 May 2017 at 06:20, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> I'd prefer for these builds to have a daily cadence because it sets the >> expectations w.r.t maintenance right: "These images are daily builds and not >> certified releases. For stable builds you're

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] [keystone] - RFC cross project request id tracking

On 05/16/2017 10:28 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Sun, 14 May 2017, Sean Dague wrote: > >> So, the basic idea is, services will optionally take an inbound >> X-OpenStack-Request-ID which will be strongly validated to the format >> (req-$uuid). They will continue to always generate one as well. When

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 16 May 2017 at 08:32, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-05-16 10:17:35 -0500: >> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 09:38:34AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> > Folks, >> > >> > See $TITLE :) >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Dims >> > >> >> My preference

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Issue while applying customs configuration to overcloud.

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 04:33:33AM +, Dnyaneshwar Pawar wrote: > Hi TripleO team, > > I am trying to apply custom configuration to an existing overcloud. (using > openstack overcloud deploy command) > Though there is no error, the configuration is in not applied to overcloud. > Am I missing

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Why drag TC into this discussion Steven? If the TC has something to say, it will be in the form of a resolution with topic "formal-vote". So please Stop! Thanks, Dims On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Flavio, > > Forgive the top post – outlook

Re: [openstack-dev] [vitrage] [nova] VM Heartbeat / Healthcheck Monitoring

On 16/05/2017, 4:36, "Sam P" wrote: Hi Greg, In Masakari [0] for VMHA, we have already implemented some what similar function in masakri-monitors. Masakari-monitors runs on nova-compute node, and monitors the host, process or instance failures.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Consolidating web themes

This all sounds really great ☺ thanks for taking it on board, Anne! No questions at present ☺ looking forward to seeing the new design! From: Anne Gentle Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"

[openstack-dev] [tricircle]cancellation of weekly meeting(May 17) due to bug smash

Hello, team, The bug smash will be held May.17~19, the weekly meeting of May. 17 will be cancelled. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang (joehuang) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][all] etcd tarballs for CI use

On 5/15/17, 11:20 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" wrote: > At this moment, though Fedora has 3.1.7 [1], Xenial is way too old, So > we will need to pull down tar balls from either [2] or [3]. proposing > backports is a possibility, but then we need some flexibility if we > end up

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Issue while applying customs configuration to overcloud.

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Dnyaneshwar Pawar < dnyaneshwar.pa...@veritas.com> wrote: > Hi TripleO team, > > I am trying to apply custom configuration to an existing overcloud. (using > openstack overcloud deploy command) > Though there is no error, the configuration is in not applied to

Re: [openstack-dev] [POC] Introduce an auto-converge policy to speedup migration

Hi Chris, Sorry for no Cc to you, I remember I have added cc Thanks, Chao Fan On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 01:30:39PM +0800, Chao Fan wrote: >On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:34:16PM -0400, Chris Friesen wrote: >>On 05/11/2017 05:58 AM, Chao Fan wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We plan to develop a policy

[openstack-dev] [storlets] No team meeting today

Hi All, There will be no team meeting today. As usual, if you have something please ping at #openstack-storlets Thanks, Eran __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Flavio Percoco wrote: > From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided releasing > projects > in any kind of built form. This was also one of the concerns I raised when > working on the proposal to support other programming languages. The problem of > releasing built images goes

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Can we stop global requirements update?

On 2017-05-16 12:10, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Tue, May 16 2017, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > >> what exactly happened with Babel? >> >> I see in global-requirements the following: >> Babel>=2.3.4,!=2.4.0 # BSD >> >> that shouldn't case a problem - or does it? Or what's the problem? > > Damn, at the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][keystone][product] api keys/application specific passwords

On 05/15/2017 10:00 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: > > > On 16/05/17 13:29, Lance Bragstad wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Adrian Turjak >> > wrote: >> Based on the specs that are currently up in Keystone-specs, I >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Issue while applying customs configuration to overcloud.

Hi Marios, Thanks for your reply. Referred example mentioned at https://docs.openstack.org/developer/tripleo-docs/advanced_deployment/extra_config.html , it is failing with error mentioned at http://paste.openstack.org/show/609644/ Regards, Dnyaneshwar From: Marios Andreou

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Can we stop global requirements update?

On 2017-05-16 11:42, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19 2017, Julien Danjou wrote: > >> So Gnocchi gate is all broken (agan) because it depends on "pbr" and >> some new release of oslo.* depends on pbr!=2.1.0. > > Same things happened today with Babel. As far as Gnocchi is concerned, >

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Can we stop global requirements update?

On Wed, Apr 19 2017, Julien Danjou wrote: > So Gnocchi gate is all broken (agan) because it depends on "pbr" and > some new release of oslo.* depends on pbr!=2.1.0. Same things happened today with Babel. As far as Gnocchi is concerned, we're going to take the easiest route and remove all our

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On Monday, 15 May 2017 21:12:16 CEST Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-15 10:52:12 -0700: > > > On 15 May 2017 at 10:34, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > I'm raising the issue here to get some more input into how to > > > proceed. Do

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest] Proposing Fanglei Zhu for Tempest core

+1. Nice work done by Fanglei and good to have her in team. -gmann On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Andrea Frittoli wrote: > Hello team, > > I'm very pleased to propose Fanglei Zhu (zhufl) for Tempest core. > > Over the past two cycle Fanglei has been steadily

[openstack-dev] [networking-sfc] pep8 failing

Hi Team, pep8 is failing in master code. *translation hint helpers *are removed from LOG messages. Is this purposefully done ? Let me know if it is not, will change it. ./networking_sfc/db/flowclassifier_db.py:342:13: N531 Log messages require translation hints! LOG.info("Deleting

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Can we stop global requirements update?

On Tue, May 16 2017, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > what exactly happened with Babel? > > I see in global-requirements the following: > Babel>=2.3.4,!=2.4.0 # BSD > > that shouldn't case a problem - or does it? Or what's the problem? Damn, at the moment I pressed the `Sent' button I thought "You just

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][all] etcd tarballs for CI use

Jesse, Great question :) We need the version that has the grpc gateway v3alpha API: https://github.com/coreos/etcd/pull/5669 Since we want to standardize on the etcd v3 API (to avoid migration of data from /v2 to /v3). Unfortunately the v3 API is gRPC based and has trouble with eventlet based

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][oslo.messaging] Call to deprecate the 'pika' driver in the oslo.messaging project

+1 too, I haven't seen its contributors since a while. On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 09:42:00PM -0400, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 15/05/17 15:29 -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: On 05/15/2017 01:55 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Davanum Srinivas (dims)'s message of 2017-05-15 14:27:36 -0400: On

[openstack-dev] [tempest] Proposing Fanglei Zhu for Tempest core

Hello team, I'm very pleased to propose Fanglei Zhu (zhufl) for Tempest core. Over the past two cycle Fanglei has been steadily contributing to Tempest and its community. She's done a great deal of work in making Tempest code cleaner, easier to read, maintain and debug, fixing bugs and removing

Re: [openstack-dev] [vitrage] [nova] VM Heartbeat / Healthcheck Monitoring

Sam, Two other more higher-level points I wanted to discuss with you about Masaraki. First, so I notice that you are doing both monitoring, auto-recovery and even host maintenance type functionality as part of the Masaraki architecture. are you open to some configurability

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 06:22, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-05-16 14:08:07 +0200: >> Flavio Percoco wrote: >> > From a release perspective, as Doug mentioned, we've avoided releasing >> > projects >> > in any kind of built form. This was

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 2017-05-16 21:53:43 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: [...] > I wouldn't say it's premature optimization, we create channels all the > time. #openstack-dev is a general discussion channel, which is used for > anything that doesn't fit anywhere else. If you look at recent logs, > you'll see

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

On 05/16/2017 03:59 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Here we have a clear topic, and TC members need to pay a certain level >> of attention to whatever is said. Mixing it with other community >> discussions (which I have to prioritize lower) just makes it harder to >> pay the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Do we need a #openstack-tc IRC channel

Thierry Carrez wrote: > Here we have a clear topic, and TC members need to pay a certain level > of attention to whatever is said. Mixing it with other community > discussions (which I have to prioritize lower) just makes it harder to > pay the right level of attention to the channel. Basically I

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

+1. ironic and trove have the same issues as well. lowering the bar in order to kick the tires will help OpenStack a lot in adoption. From: Sean Dague [s...@dague.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 6:28 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 09:51:00 -0700: > On 16 May 2017 at 09:40, Clint Byrum wrote: > > > > What's at stake isn't so much "how do we get the bits to the users" but > > "how do we only get bits to users that they need". If you build and push > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

My guess is same with octavia. https://github.com/openstack/octavia/tree/master/diskimage-create#diskimage-builder-script-for-creating-octavia-amphora-images -Josh Fox, Kevin M wrote: +1. ironic and trove have the same issues as well. lowering the bar in order to kick the tires will help

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 16 May 2017 at 11:49, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 11:38:19 -0700: >> On 16 May 2017 at 11:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2017-05-16 09:46:19 -0700: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

And bandwidth can be conserved by only uploading images that actually changed in non trivial ways (packages were updated, not just logfile with a new timestamp) Thanks, Keivn From: Michał Jastrzębski [inc...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 11:46

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][infra][release][security][stable][kolla][loci][tripleo][docker][kubernetes] do we want to be publishing binary container images?

On 2017-05-16 11:46:14 -0700 (-0700), Michał Jastrzębski wrote: [...] > So CVE tracking might not be required by us. Since we still use > distro packages under the hood, we can just use these. [...] I think the question is how I, as a semi-clueful downstream user of your images, can tell whether

  1   2   >