On 23.05.2017 2:20, John Dickinson wrote:
>
>
> On 22 May 2017, at 15:50, Anne Gentle wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Sean McGinnis
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 09:39:09AM +, Alexandra Settle wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
1. We could combine
Hello, team,
Agenda of May.24 weekly meeting:
1. feature implementation review
2. Pike-2 preparation
3. Open Discussion
How to join:
# IRC meeting: https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=openstack-meeting on
every Wednesday starting from UTC 01:00.
If you have other topics to be
On Tue, May 23 2017, Hanxi Liu wrote:
> Can we restore weekly meeting or discuss in some centralized way just like
> other TC
> projects so that some developers can get timely responses and brainstorm
> for Telemetry?
There's a weekly IRC meeting for Telemetry, but it is only run if
there's
Hi,
There will be no neutron team meeting today due to a conflict on my end.
If you have any announcements, please direct them to the mailing list. Ask
any questions about bugs or blueprints in the #openstack-neutron channel.
Cheers,
Kevin Benton
On Tue, May 23 2017, gordon chung wrote:
> i just want to add, i am ok to meet at PTG but if we consider the turn
> out at forum sessions, we aren't getting any more developers, just
> random requirement requests.
>
> we can discuss on irc and mailing list? in fact we encourage it, which
> is
Polls are closed now, with six positive votes.
Welcome to the team Fanglei!
andrea
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 10:59 AM Attila Fazekas wrote:
> +1, Totally agree.
>
> Best Regards,
> Attila
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Andrea Frittoli <
> andrea.fritt...@gmail.com>
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Juan Antonio Osorio
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Rabi Mishra wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As per the updated community goal[1] for api deployment with wsgi, we've
>> to transition to use uwsgi rather than
On Tue, May 23 2017, Andres Alvarez wrote:
> Hello everyone
>
> I am having a hard time in understanding the correct way to run the tests
> in Gnocchi. I have already read about tox and testr, but it seems I still
> can't get to run the tests.
tox -e py27-postgresql-file
That'll run the test
Hi All,
I have a query on usage of L2GW NB API.
I have to integrate L2GW with ODL.
And there are two L2GW nodes named l2gw1 and l2gw2.
OVS HW VTEP Emulator is running on each node.
Does the following command work for configuring these two nodes a L2GW HA
Cluster?
neutron
> >
> > - Is it that the reporting process is too heavy ? (requiring answers
> > from projects that are obviously unaffected)
>
> I've thought about this, OSC was unaffected by one of the goals but
> not the other, so I can't really hide in this bucket. It really is
> not that hard to put up a
On 05/22/2017 11:26 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 5/22/2017 10:58 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> I think these are actually compatible concerns. The current proposal to
>> me actually tries to address A1 & B1, with a hint about why A2 is
>> valuable and we would want to do that.
>>
>> It feels like
Not an offender, apparently, but lemme throw some less optimistic views here.
On 05/23/2017 12:40 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
OK, I'll bite, being one of the until-last-week offenders...
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
As part of release management we
On Tue, 23 May 2017, Sean Dague wrote:
Do you have an example of an Open Source project that (after it was
widely deployed) replaced their core storage engine for their existing
users?
That's not the point here. The point is that new deployments may
choose to use a different one and old ones
Hi,
We are building a multi-node physical set-up of OpenStack Newton. The
goal is to finally integrate the set-up with OVN.
Lab details:
1 Controller, 2 computes
CentOS-7.3, OpenStack Newton, separate network for mgmt and tunnel
OVS version: 2.6.1
I followed the following guide to deploy
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 22/05/17 05:39, Alexandra Settle wrote:
>
>> 1. We could combine all of the documentation builds, so that each
>> project has a single doc/source directory that includes developer,
>> contributor, and user
On Mon, 22 May 2017, Sean Dague wrote:
This feels like what a Tier 2 support looks like. A basic SQLA and pray
so that if you live behind SQLA you are probably fine (though not
tested), and then test and advanced feature roll out on a single
platform. Any of that work might port to other
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> I'd like to propose an idea to make one or two days hackathon in TripleO
> project with main goal - to reduce deployment time of TripleO.
>
> - How could it be arranged?
>
> We can arrange a separate IRC
On 2017-05-23 05:40:05 -0500 (-0500), Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
[...]
> > - Is it that the reporting process is too heavy ? (requiring answers
> > from projects that are obviously unaffected)
>
> I've thought about this,
On 23/05/17 08:35, Alexandra Settle wrote:
So, I’ve been a docs core for the OpenStack-Ansible project for some time now
and this works really well within our structure. I do not merge anything unless
it has a dev +2 before I come along (unless it is a trivial doc-only
spelling/grammar
On Mon, 22 May 2017, Eric K wrote:
If someone out there knows uWSGI and has a couple spare cycles to help
Congress project, we'd super appreciate it.
The regular contributors to Congress don't have experience with uWSGI and
could definitely use some help getting started with this goal. Thanks
> I prefer option 1, which should be obvious from Anne's reference to my
exiting work to enable that. Option 2 seems yucky (to me) because it adds yet
another docs tree and sphinx config to projects, and thus is counter to my hope
that we'll have one single docs tree per repo.
>
On 05/23/2017 07:23 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
>> Some operations have one and only one "right" way to be done. For
>> those operations if we take an 'active' approach, we can implement
>> them once and not make all of our deployers and distributors each
>> implement and run them. However, there is a
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 05:50:50PM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Sean McGinnis
> wrote:
>
> >
> > [snip]
> >
>
> Hey Sean, is the "right to merge" the top difficulty you envision with 1 or
> 2? Or is it finding people to do the writing and
On 22/05/17 05:39, Alexandra Settle wrote:
1. We could combine all of the documentation builds, so that each
project has a single doc/source directory that includes developer,
contributor, and user documentation. This option would reduce the number
of build jobs we have to run, and cut down on
On Sun, 21 May 2017, Monty Taylor wrote:
As the discussion around PostgreSQL has progressed, it has come clear to me
that there is a decently deep philosophical question on which we do not
currently share either definition or agreement. I believe that the lack of
clarity on this point is one
OK, I'll bite, being one of the until-last-week offenders...
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> As part of release management we remind projects of the release cycle
> deadlines, including the ones regarding the release goals process.
>
> According to
Hi, all
I'd like to propose an idea to make one or two days hackathon in TripleO
project with main goal - to reduce deployment time of TripleO.
- How could it be arranged?
We can arrange a separate IRC channel and Bluejeans video conference
session for hackathon in these days to create a
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:47:44PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> Just wanted to point out that someone else requested this again today:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466595/
>
> 30 seconds going through launchpad for old blueprints found at least 4
> others:
>
>
Team,
Background:
For projects based on Go and Containers we need to ship binaries, for
example Kubernetes, etcd both ship binaries and maintain stable
branches as well.
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/releases
https://github.com/coreos/etcd/releases/
Kubernetes for example ships
On 23/05/17 10:44 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Team,
Background:
For projects based on Go and Containers we need to ship binaries, for
example Kubernetes, etcd both ship binaries and maintain stable
branches as well.
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/releases
Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-05-23 08:58:08 -0500:
> > >
> > > - Is it that the reporting process is too heavy ? (requiring answers
> > > from projects that are obviously unaffected)
> >
> > I've thought about this, OSC was unaffected by one of the goals but
> > not the other, so
On 22/05/17 22:58, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 05/22/2017 12:01 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 19/05/17 17:59, Matt Riedemann wrote:
I'm not really sure what you're referring to here with 'update' and [1].
Can you expand on that? I know it's a bit of a tangent.
If the user does a stack update that
Hi all,
I've started to dig through the part of Ironic code that deals with glance
and I am confused by some things:
1) Glance image service classes have methods to create, update and delete
images. What's the use case behind them? Is ironic supposed to actively
manage images? Besides, these do
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> I'd like to propose an idea to make one or two days hackathon in TripleO
> project with main goal - to reduce deployment time of TripleO.
>
> - How could it be arranged?
>
> We can arrange a separate IRC
Comments below..
On 5/21/2017 1:38 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
Hi all!
As the discussion around PostgreSQL has progressed, it has come clear
to me that there is a decently deep philosophical question on which we
do not currently share either definition or agreement. I believe that
the lack of
On 23 May 2017 4:51 am, "Matt Riedemann" wrote:
Is this really something we are going to have to deny at least once per
release? My God how is it that this is the #1 thing everyone for all time
has always wanted Nova to do for them?
Is it entirely unreasonable to turn
+1 as again it can assist us as an entire community (dev/non-dev) to
galvanize around one tool
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Sean McGinnis
wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:54:13AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > This has come up several times in
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-05-22 19:16:34 +:
>> On 2017-05-22 12:31:49 -0600 (-0600), Alex Schultz wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>> > >
Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-05-23 13:57:53 +:
> On 2017-05-23 05:40:05 -0500 (-0500), Dean Troyer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Thierry Carrez
> > wrote:
> [...]
> > > - Is it that the reporting process is too heavy ? (requiring answers
Excerpts from Davanum Srinivas (dims)'s message of 2017-05-23 10:44:30 -0400:
> Team,
>
> Background:
> For projects based on Go and Containers we need to ship binaries, for
Can you elaborate on the use of the term "need" here. Is that because
otherwise the projects can't be consumed? Is it the
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:54:13AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Folks,
>
> This has come up several times in various conversations.
>
> Can we please stop activity on
> https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/golang-client/ and just
> settle down on
On 23 May 2017, at 8:05, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2017-05-23 08:58:08 -0500:
- Is it that the reporting process is too heavy ? (requiring answers
from projects that are obviously unaffected)
>>>
>>> I've thought about this, OSC was
On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
Is it entirely unreasonable to turn the question around and ask why,
given it is such a commonly requested feature, the Nova team are so
resistant to it?
Because it's technical debt for one thing. Adding more orchestration
adds complexity, which
Folks,
This has come up several times in various conversations.
Can we please stop activity on
https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/golang-client/ and just
settle down on https://github.com/gophercloud/gophercloud ?
This becomes important since new container-y projects like
Apologies for the spam. Resending with the earlier missed [openstack-dev]
tag to the subject for greater visibility.
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Rabi Mishra wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As per the updated community goal[1] for api deployment with wsgi, we've
> to transition
> On 2017. May 23., at 15:43, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 05:50:50PM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Sean McGinnis
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>
>> Hey Sean, is the "right to merge" the
The Murano meeting is cancelled today because I have a company-related event I
must attend and cannot find anyone to cover the meeting for me. Should anyone
have any questions, feel free to reach me on IRC (felipemonteiro).
Felipe
> > >
> >
> > What if we also require +1 from the "core six" projects on goal proposals?
> > If we at least have buy in from those projects, then we can know that we
> > should be able to get them as a minimum, with other projects more than
> > likely to then follow suit.
>
> Because we do not
As OpenStack has evolved and grown, we are ending up with more and more
MySQL-isms in the code. I'd love to see OpenStack support every database
out there, but that is becoming more and more difficult. I've tried to
get OpenStack to work with other databases like Oracle DB, MongoDB,
TimesTen,
Hi,
We are glad to present this week's priorities and subteam report for Ironic. As
usual, this is pulled directly from the Ironic whiteboard[0] and formatted.
This Week's Priorities (as of the weekly ironic meeting)
1. rolling upgrades
W dniu 06.04.2017 o 00:05, Erin Disney pisze:
> We will share registration and sponsorship information soon on this
> mailing list. Mark your calendars and we hope to see you in Denver!
Any update? I need to collect info about costs for my trip.
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2017-05-22 21:48:37 -0500:
> I think Doug and I have talked about this before, but it came up again
> tonight.
>
> There seems to be an issue where release notes for the current series
> don't show up in the published release notes, but unreleased
Hi Alex,
First of all thank you for writing this up the summary and list options with
their expected impacts.
>
> 1. We could combine all of the documentation builds, so that each project has
> a single doc/source directory that includes developer, contributor, and user
> documentation. This
Hi Felipe / Murano community,
I was wondering how would people feel about revising the time for the
Murano weekly meeting?
Personally the current time is difficult for me to attend as it falls at
the end of a work day, I also have some colleagues that would like to
attend but can't at the
On 05/23/2017 05:52 PM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy wrote:
Hi all,
I've started to dig through the part of Ironic code that deals with glance and I
am confused by some things:
1) Glance image service classes have methods to create, update and delete
images. What's the use case behind them? Is
Is there a proposal where deployments who chose Postgres on good faith can find
migration path to a MySQL based solution?
Tim
On 23.05.17, 18:35, "Octave J. Orgeron" wrote:
As OpenStack has evolved and grown, we are ending up with more and more
MySQL-isms
On 05/23/2017 01:10 PM, Octave J. Orgeron wrote:
Comments below..
On 5/21/2017 1:38 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
For example: An HA strategy using slave promotion and a VIP that
points at the current write master paired with an application
incorrectly configured to do such a thing can lead to
With the advent Thierry's weekly status reports[^1] on the proposals
currently under review by the TC and the optionality of the weekly
TC meetings, this report becomes less about meeting minutes and more
about reporting on the things that crossed my TC radar that seemed
important and/or that
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote:
>> Hi, all
>>
>> I'd like to propose an idea to make one or two days hackathon in TripleO
>> project with main goal - to reduce deployment time
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/17/2017 12:25 PM, Major Hayden wrote:
> So my questions are:
>
> 1) Should the openstack-ansible-security role be
> renamed to alleviate confusion?
>
> 2) If it should be renamed, what's your suggestion?
Thanks for all of the
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Folks,
>
> This has come up several times in various conversations.
>
> Can we please stop activity on
> https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/golang-client/ and just
> settle down on
On 05/23/2017 07:23 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
That "higher dev cost" is one of my objections to the 'active'
approach but it is another implication that worries me more. If we
limit deployer architecture choices at the persistence layer then it
seems very likely that we will be tempted to build more
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Davanum Srinivas
wrote:
> John,
>
> I had heard this a few time in Boston Summit. So want to put this to bed :)
>
> -- Dims
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 2:43 PM, John Griffith
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 23, 2017
On May 23, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> [1] Witness the join constructs in Golang in Kubernetes as they work around
> etcd not being a relational data store:
Maybe it’s just me, but I found that Go code more understandable than some of
the SQL we are using in the
On 05/23/2017 03:16 PM, Edward Leafe wrote:
On May 23, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
[1] Witness the join constructs in Golang in Kubernetes as they work around
etcd not being a relational data store:
Maybe it’s just me, but I found that Go code more understandable
On 23/05/17 01:23, Rabi Mishra wrote:
Hi All,
As per the updated community goal[1] for api deployment with wsgi,
we've to transition to use uwsgi rather than mod_wsgi at the gate. It
also seems mod_wsgi support would be removed from devstack in Queens.
I've been working on a patch[2] for the
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>
>> Is it entirely unreasonable to turn the question around and ask why,
>> given it is such a commonly requested feature, the Nova team are so
>> resistant to it?
>>
>
>
Hi everyone,
First of all, really fun to see the interest for the group and the forum
sessions we moderated in Boston. I hope that we can keep up that spirit
and looking forward to a lot of participants in the bi-weekly meetings
for this cycle.
So, reminder for tomorrows meeting for the
On 19/05/17 19:53, Kevin Benton wrote:
So making a subnet ID mandatory for a port creation and
a RouterInterface ID mandatory for a Floating IP creation are both
possible in Heat without Neutron changes. Presumably you haven't done
that because it's backwards-incompatible, but you would need to
John,
I had heard this a few time in Boston Summit. So want to put this to bed :)
-- Dims
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 2:43 PM, John Griffith wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> This has come up
On Tue, 23 May 2017, Jay Pipes wrote:
Err, in my experience, having a *completely* dumb persistence layer -- i.e.
one that tries to assuage the differences between, say, relational and
non-relational stores -- is a recipe for disaster. The developer just ends up
writing join constructs in
Excerpts from John Dickinson's message of 2017-05-23 09:12:29 -0700:
>
> I can sympathize with the "do it tomorrow" turns into 6 weeks later...
>
> Part of the issue for me, personally, is that a governance patch
> does *not* feel simple or lightweight. I assume (in part based on
> experience)
On 23 May 2017 at 08:13, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Davanum Srinivas (dims)'s message of 2017-05-23 10:44:30 -0400:
>> Team,
>>
>> Background:
>> For projects based on Go and Containers we need to ship binaries, for
>
> Can you elaborate on the use of the term
I'm in favor of option #1. I think it encourages our developers to become
better writers with guidance from the docs team. While ensuring docs are
proposed prior to merging the implementation cross-repository is totally
possible, I think #1 makes that flow easier.
Thanks for putting together the
On 2017-04-05 06:05 PM, Erin Disney wrote:
We are excited to announce the September Project Teams Gathering in Denver, CO
at the Denver Renaissance Stapleton Hotel this September 11th-15th.
As mentioned at the Atlanta PTG feedback session in February, we had narrowed
down our PTG location
On 05/23/2017 06:27 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
On 2017-05-23 07:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
On 2017-04-05 06:05 PM, Erin Disney wrote:
We are excited to announce the September Project Teams Gathering in
Denver, CO at the Denver Renaissance Stapleton Hotel this September
11th-15th.
As mentioned at the
On 5/23/2017 4:43 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
In this particular case it may not be necessary, but I think early
implementation of composite features in clients is actually the right
way to prove the utility of these things going forward. Establish and
document the process, implement in a way for
On 05/23/2017 02:35 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> Is there a proposal where deployments who chose Postgres on good faith can
> find migration path to a MySQL based solution?
Yes, a migration tool exploration is action #2 in the current proposal.
Also, to be clear, we're not at the stage of removing
Thanks. It’s more of a question of not leaving people high and dry when they
have made a reasonable choice in the past based on the choices supported at the
time.
Tim
On 23.05.17, 21:14, "Sean Dague" wrote:
On 05/23/2017 02:35 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> Is there a proposal
On 05/23/2017 03:16 PM, Edward Leafe wrote:
On May 23, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
[1] Witness the join constructs in Golang in Kubernetes as they work around
etcd not being a relational data store:
Maybe it’s just me, but I found that Go code more
On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 23 May 2017 4:51 am, "Matt Riedemann" > wrote:
Is this really something we are going to have to deny at least
once per release? My God how is it that this is the #1 thing
everyone
Zane,
> This is your periodic reminder that we have ~50 applications sharing the
> same database and not only do none of them know how the deployer will
> configure the database, most will not even have an idea which set of
> assumptions the other ~49 are making about how the deployer will
On 2017-05-23 07:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
On 2017-04-05 06:05 PM, Erin Disney wrote:
We are excited to announce the September Project Teams Gathering in
Denver, CO at the Denver Renaissance Stapleton Hotel this September
11th-15th.
As mentioned at the Atlanta PTG feedback session in
On 05/23/2017 07:07 PM, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
And how can someone, that is trying to deploy OpenStack, understand/find
the right config for db? Or it's Ops tasks and community doesn't care
about them?
Neither. It's the ops responsibility to understand database
configuration fundamentals
On 21/05/17 15:38, Monty Taylor wrote:
One might argue that HA strategies are an operator concern, but in
reality the set of workable HA strategies is tightly constrained by how
the application works, and the pairing an application expecting one HA
strategy with a deployment implementing a
If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy conversations with Nova
folks I get it), do we consider just orchestrating this from say
OpenStack Client completely? The last resort (and it's an awful option)
is
On 5/23/2017 2:44 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
Doing LTS is probably too big for that, but "stable branch
reviews" is not.
Oh if we only had more things to review on stable branches. It's also
just at a bare minimum having people propose backports. Very few
people/organizations actually do that
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>
>> If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
>> the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy conversations with Nova folks
>> I get it), do we consider just orchestrating this from say
I had expected more cinder/nova sessions the first days, so I like that
proposal.
If we are able to minimize project overlap or have alternatives the last 3
days I think we are moving towards a better solution.
Jay
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 9:18 AM Thierry Carrez
wrote:
>
Dear all,
A gentle reminder for our meeting tomorrow.
As usual, the agenda is available at:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/massively_distributed_ircmeetings_2017 (line
597)
Please feel free to add items.
Best,
ad_rien_
On 2017-05-23 20:44:54 +0100 (+0100), Chris Dent wrote:
[...]
> ## OpenStack moving too fast and too slow
[...]
> summit happened, people moved on to other things and there wasn't
> much in the way of resolution. Is there anything we could or
> should be doing here?
[...]
The session for this
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mriede...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 8:59 PM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] on the subject of when we should be deprecating
> API's in a release cycle
>
> On 5/23/2017 7:50 PM,
On 08/05/17 21:45, 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 update validations. I took an AI to look at the current status of
> tripleo-validations [0] and posted a
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:57 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 23/05/17 01:23, Rabi Mishra wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As per the updated community goal[1] for api deployment with wsgi,
>> we've to transition to use uwsgi rather than mod_wsgi at the gate. It
>> also seems mod_wsgi
From: Ildiko
> On 2017. May 23., at 15:43, Sean McGinnis
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 05:50:50PM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Sean McGinnis
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> [snip]
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hey
It’s definitely a nice feature to have for end user, actually we implemented it
our own because we need this but
nova doesn’t support.
Yingjun
> On May 24, 2017, at 6:58 AM, Jay Bryant wrote:
>
>
> On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23 May 2017
Ok so started the tests using:
tox -e py27-postgresql-file
The suite starts running fine, but then I get a failing test:
==
Failed 1 tests - output below:
==
gnocchi.tests.test_indexer.TestIndexerDriver.test_list_resources_without_history
On 廿十七年五月廿四日 朝 09:38, Rochelle Grober wrote:
From: Ildiko
> On 2017. May 23., at 15:43, Sean McGinnis
wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 05:50:50PM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Sean McGinnis
wrote:
[snip]
Hey
TL;DR
When IaaS projects in OpenStack deprecate their API's after milestone 1, it
puts PaaS projects in a pickle. I think it would be much better for PaaS
projects if the IaaS projects could please do their deprecations well before
milestone-1
The longer issue:
OK, the guy from Trove is
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Sean McGinnis
> wrote:
> >
> >> If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
> >> the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo