[openstack-dev] [stable] Stable* wiki updates

Hi stable-maints, FYI I've updated https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch and https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease now that all policy and team information has ben included in the Project Team Guide. Please review in case I missed something! Cheers, Alan

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ml2][Manila] API to query segments used during port binding

Hi folks, I had a deep dive session with Bob (thx Bob). We have a plan to solve the issue without any change of APIs or manila driver reworks. The process will look like the following: 1.) In case of multi-segment/hpb Manila creates a port like Ironic ML2 would do it [1]: vif_type =

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][All][Manila] Api development question - nested urls - which approach is better?

*"Option3":* · Create access-group-entry -- POST '/access_groups/%s/entries' · Show access-group-entry -- GET '/access_groups/entries/%s' · List access-group-entries -- GET '/access_groups/entries' · List access-group-entries with filter by access group ID

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Trouble mapping the Remote PXE node

Hi, I'm using Fuel 7.0, trying to evaluate remote compute and node group I've configured a remote PXE and I'm able to boot the node successfully onto the remote pxe, but while adding it to the environment and trying to configure interface I'm stuck with following error fuel node --node-id

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Compatibility of fuel plugins and fuel versions

Thank you for comments folks. Clarifications, with the feedback incorporated: 1) We can install plugin developed against 8 to Fuel Mitaka (9). But it won't appear in the UI as available plugin. This is what I want to fix, and have just a warning that this plugin may not work. 2) To clarify, I'm

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] issue of ResourceGroup in Heat template

Hi Jay, Thanks for your reply. > Is this still an issue when you remove the resource group and create the > resource directly? The count of 1 might just be for testing purposes, but if > that's the end goal you should be able to drop the group entirely. Unfortunately, the count of 1 is just

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] issue of ResourceGroup in Heat template

Hi Zane, Thanks for your reply. I guess you mean that IP address of rg_a should be available AS SOON AS/AFTER the server of rg_a becomes CREATE_COMPLETE? As Sergey pointed out, there is a chance that IP address might be available when the server of rg_a becomes CREATE_COMPLETE. Actually,

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][All][Manila] Api development question - nested urls - which approach is better?

Hi All, This is a general doubt related to taking a decision on REST API url construction. In case of “nested urls”, lets say I have a relationship between two entities as below: access_group is parent can have many access_group_entries. Now for accessing access_group I have already created

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] issue of ResourceGroup in Heat template

Hi Sergey, Thanks for your reply. Thanks for your pointing out that "depends_on" is not needed when we have already used "get_attr". >you create in rg_a some Server and probably it goes to active state before ip >address becomes available for get_attr. It is necessary to check, but if it's

[openstack-dev] [heat] SSL(https) support for software configuration

Hi, There are certain gaps in SSL(https mainly) support in software configuration and I would like to discuss it. This is in addition to what is described in bug #1482510 [1]. I am not sure if all of this is already thought by folks, if so do let me know. Tools for software configuration should

[openstack-dev] What's Up, Doc? 11 March 2016

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi everyone, This week I've been smashing some older bugs from our queue, and can now confirm that as a team we've closed everything older than a year! What a great effort, and a fabulous way to go into our release period. We have less than a

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Proposal to add Diana Whitten tohorizon-core

+1 from me, thanks for all the hard work! On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Michael Krotscheck wrote: > +1. Another vote in favor of ditching django altogether is good by me :) > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 11:25 AM Thai Q Tran wrote: > >> Big +1 from me,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 03/09/2016 04:35 PM, Fei Long Wang wrote: Hi all, Yesterday I just found cloudkitty is using the same default port () which is used by Zaqar now. So I'm wondering if there is any rule/policy for those new services need to be aware. I googled but can't find anything about this. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Question about electorate for project without gerrit contribution

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:45:14PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > The electorate rolls for project-teams without any > deliverables/repos end up being limited to the "extra-atc" entries > for them. For example, the I18N team has done an excellent job of > providing a curated list of active

Re: [openstack-dev] Reg: Configuration Management tool for Openstack.

You can also use Chef for either a small-scale or production level deployment. Check out https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Chef/GettingStarted for a bit more context, or if you just want to jump in head-first https://github.com/openstack/openstack-chef-repo/blob/master/README.md On Thu, Mar 10,

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Contributing to TripleO is challenging

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > That's not the name of any Summit's talk, it's just an e-mail I wanted > to write for a long time. > > It is an attempt to expose facts or things I've heard a lot; and bring > constructive thoughts about why it's

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Regarding #2 > we already generate from templates required information for a plugin developer to start development and it is great. So, back to what I said: > However, we can have fpb generating template plugin, with commented code in there. If you uncomment, you a get a comprehensive example of a

[openstack-dev] [all][Elections] Nominations for OpenStack PTLs (Program Team Leads) are now open

Nominations for OpenStack PTLs (Program Team Leads) are now open and will remain open until March 17, 23:59 UTC. All candidates must be submitted as a text file to the openstack/election repository as explained on the wiki[0]. In order to be an eligible candidate (and be allowed to vote) in a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Question about electorate for project without gerrit contribution

On 03/10/2016 05:45 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: Packaging-Deb is the only one I see in an especially strange state at the moment: it has one existing repo (the rest are phantoms which were never created) with two Gerrit changes, both owned by the team's sole code contributor (based on our

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On 10/03/2016 4:26 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from gordon chung's message of 2016-03-10 13:17:25 +: >> >> On 09/03/2016 12:26 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've >>> prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Question about electorate for project without gerrit contribution

On 2016-03-10 22:05:00 + (+), Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Projects such as Openstack UX, Packaging Deb and i18n do not have active > contributions we can collect from git repos listed as project > deliverables. For these projects, how can the election officials > validate PTL candidacy and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE request for osnailyfacter refactoring for Puppet Master compatibility

Granted, merge deadlines are still as defined below: March 16 and 24. For the record, the spec for this feature: https://review.openstack.org/284853 The spec has positive votes from fuel-library CL and cores, so consensus is indeed reached. Get a +1 from the fuel-python CL and I'll merge it. --

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Unlock Settings Tab

Granted. Design consensus deadline for the task history part of this feature is extended to March 11. This does not change the merge deadline for other parts of this feature, which is still March 24. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 01:02:52AM +0300, Alexey Shtokolov wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] becoming third party CI (was: enabling third party CI)

On 2016-03-10 16:09:44 -0500 (-0500), Dan Prince wrote: > This seems to be the week people want to pile it on TripleO. Talking > about upstream is great but I suppose I'd rather debate major changes > after we branch Mitaka. :/ [...] I didn't mean to pile on TripleO, nor did I intend to imply

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Xav Paice wrote: > > > On 11 March 2016 at 10:45, Morgan Fainberg > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Xav Paice wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> A simple list is probably enough for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl][cinder] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 04:19:55PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2016-03-09 15:53:31 -0600: > > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:26:18PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > > > prepared a list of

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara]FFE Request for resume EDP job

Yup, I'm expecting all FFEs to be merged by the EOW, otherwise we'll be revisiting case by case with reject by default. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from lu jander's message of 2016-03-07 14:28:21 +0800: > > Hi folks, > > > > I would

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

Hi, I agree with Doug, if we'll be able to have green CI and no -1's it's ok to be merged, so FFE granted. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Grigoriy Roghkov's message of 2016-03-10 15:56:23 +0200: > > Hi, > > > > Untill release of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Unlock Settings Tab

Dmitry, We are really close to have the consensus, but we need one more meeting with Fuel-Python Component Lead Igor Kalnitsky to make the final decision. All patches [0] are on review. The meeting is scheduled for tomorrow (03/11 1:30pm CET). Could you please grant us one more day for it? [0] -

[openstack-dev] [tc] Question about electorate for project without gerrit contribution

Projects such as Openstack UX, Packaging Deb and i18n do not have active contributions we can collect from git repos listed as project deliverables. For these projects, how can the election officials validate PTL candidacy and what would be the electorate roll in case of an election ? Regards,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 11 March 2016 at 10:45, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Xav Paice wrote: > >> >> >> A simple list is probably enough for a quick ref - it's not a massive >> blocker if two projects slip up and get the same port

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Xav Paice wrote: > Remember that we're talking here about all the projects, not just > keystone. I can't see that we'll move everything to subpaths at any time > soon, and until that point we still need to at least make an informal >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Xav Paice wrote: > Remember that we're talking here about all the projects, not just > keystone. I can't see that we'll move everything to subpaths at any time > soon, and until that point we still need to at least make an informal >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/10/2016 07:11 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > > > > From: Sylvain Bauza > > > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara]FFE Request for resume EDP job

Excerpts from lu jander's message of 2016-03-07 14:28:21 +0800: > Hi folks, > > I would like to request a FFE for the feature “Resume EDP job”: > > > > BP: > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sahara/+spec/add-suspend-resume-ability-for-edp-jobs >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] [FFE] Support TOSCA definitions for applications

Excerpts from Serg Melikyan's message of 2016-03-07 12:19:33 -0800: > I have no objection regarding granting this FFE. > > This feature is developed as a plugin for Murano, placed in contrib > folder and is not going to affect our main codebase in any way, so I > am pretty sure that it's safe to

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

Excerpts from Grigoriy Roghkov's message of 2016-03-10 15:56:23 +0200: > Hi, > > Untill release of MapR 5.1.0 I couldn't have it added to sahara. > The release happened this day and 5.1.0 still can be add in Mitaka release. > > There are two patches to be merged: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 10 March 2016 at 10:35, Fei Long Wang wrote: > The only link I can find is > http://docs.openstack.org/liberty/config-reference/content/firewalls-default-ports.html. > So my question is should we document the default ports list on an official > place given the big

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

Remember that we're talking here about all the projects, not just keystone. I can't see that we'll move everything to subpaths at any time soon, and until that point we still need to at least make an informal agreement as to which 'default' port to expect services to live on. Even if that's just

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] becoming third party CI (was: enabling third party CI)

On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 13:45 -0500, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:32:15PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > > > On 2016-03-10 09:50:03 -0500 (-0500), Emilien Macchi wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > OpenStack Infra provides an easy way to plug CI systems and some > > > CIs (Nova,

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

Excerpts from gordon chung's message of 2016-03-10 13:17:25 +: > > On 09/03/2016 12:26 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > > prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions from which > > we will create stable/mitaka

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl][cinder] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2016-03-09 15:53:31 -0600: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:26:18PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > > prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions from which > > we will create

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On 10/03/16 06:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions from which > we will create stable/mitaka branches, and need each team to sign off on > the versions. If you know you intend to

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance]Why vm boots from the cirros image so slow?

-Original Message- From: Zhi Chang Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: March 10, 2016 at 00:54:26 To: openstack-dev Subject:  [openstack-dev]

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] becoming third party CI (was: enabling third party CI)

This seems to be the week people want to pile it on TripleO. Talking about upstream is great but I suppose I'd rather debate major changes after we branch Mitaka. :/ Anyways, might as well get into it now. replies inline On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 17:32 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Ihar as *-aas core reviewer

+1 Great addition! On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:14 PM Doug Wiegley wrote: > The cleanup was my fault. I had removed folks that were added initially > just for the initial *aas split. Welcome back. :-) > > Thanks, > doug > > > On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:33 AM, Ihar

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

Hi All, The following API guideline is ready for final review. It will be merged on March 18, if there's no further feedback. 1. Header non-proliferation guideline https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280381/ Cheers, Everett

Re: [openstack-dev] Branch miss-match between server and client in Kilo

Hi there Janki. Thanks for catching that. I think we can address this by creating a branch for the client that aligns with kilo. I’ve triaged the magnum bug on this, and I’m willing to help drive it to resolution together. Regards, Adrian On Mar 9, 2016, at 8:16 PM, Janki Chhatbar

[openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] Release countdown for week R-3, Mar 14-18

Focus - Project teams following the cycle-with-milestone model should be preparing their first Mitaka release candidate this week. The first release candidate should be tagged (using X.Y.Z.0rc1) as soon as the pressure to unfreeze master is stronger than the cost of backporting bugfixes,

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Glance Mitaka: Passing the torch

I am not involved in Glance, however this was well worth reading for the experiences during the cycle, not just as a PTL but as a team and the communication of improving the software development process. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Bhandaru, Malini K < malini.k.bhand...@intel.com> wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [bug-smash] Global OpenStack Bug Smash Mitaka

I attended the first day of the bugsmash event in New York and I have some general feedback for future organizers of these types of events. Hopefully others can also share their experiences. These comments are for the benefit of making the event better the next time. As I attended only one

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [trove][stable] proboscis tests randomly failing in stable branches; bug 1538506

On 3/9/2016 3:14 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 3/9/2016 2:15 PM, Amrith Kumar wrote: Thanks Matt. Agreed on 1, 2, 3, and 4. The reason for #5 is that there are other changes (for which we have FFE's) which will be merged and a new version of the client requested. Specifically, this change

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > openstack/os-client-config 1.16.0 > openstack/cliff 2.0.0 > I believe these are good to go as-is. dt -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com __

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra] Switching images for testing

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 04:41:43PM +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > We're migrating already since Friday jobs using the so-called > bare-trusty images to ubuntu-trusty images. > > These images are used for for most of unit and functional tests, for > documentation etc. Devstack is still run on

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] becoming third party CI (was: enabling third party CI)

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:32:15PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-03-10 09:50:03 -0500 (-0500), Emilien Macchi wrote: > [...] > > OpenStack Infra provides an easy way to plug CI systems and some > > CIs (Nova, Neutron, Cinder, etc) already gate on some third party > > systems. I was

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:26:18PM -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote: > openstack/ironic-lib 1.1.0 > openstack/python-ironic-inspector-client 1.5.0 > openstack/python-ironicclient 1.2.0 +1, thanks Doug :) // jim __ OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Mitaka release planning

On 3 March 2016 at 12:05, Armando M. wrote: > Hi Neutrinos, > > Mitaka-3 is out [1] and we should be focussing on rc1. This is the time > where we switch gear: > >- Test M-3, find issues and target them for RC1 [2]; >- Apply/agree for FFE status for pending features on

[openstack-dev] KVM Forum 2016: Call For Participation

= KVM Forum 2016: Call For Participation August 24-26, 2016 - Westin Harbor Castle - Toronto, Canada (All submissions must be received before midnight May 1, 2016) =

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem: Inside VM "fuel-master"

Samer, great it works for you! :) Please don't hesitate to get in touch with the team in #fuel-dev if needed. Regards, Igor Marnat On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Samer Machara < samer.mach...@telecom-sudparis.eu> wrote: > Hi, > I already have VirtualBox 5.0; I run the script again, and now

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] Javascript linting and documentation

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:15 PM Richard Jones wrote: > > We already have a "lintq" npm task that does this, which most of us use. > The problem is that we then ignore all the legitimate code linting warnings. > I think we both agree that some form of jsdoc linting is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] Javascript linting and documentation

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:45 PM Tripp, Travis S wrote: > The problem is that the warnings are so great that is really hard to read. > If all the warnings were fixed - I know Matt Borland's working on that - would we be having this conversation? Michael

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] becoming third party CI (was: enabling third party CI)

On 2016-03-10 09:50:03 -0500 (-0500), Emilien Macchi wrote: [...] > OpenStack Infra provides an easy way to plug CI systems and some > CIs (Nova, Neutron, Cinder, etc) already gate on some third party > systems. I was wondering if we would not be interested to > investigate this area and maybe ask

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE request for osnailyfacter refactoring for Puppet Master compatibility

Hi Dmitry, We have reached design agreement on this feature as of this morning, March 10th. The spec has been accepted and the test/merge plan presented for remaining patches by March 24 was agreed upon. Can the conditional status of the FFE request be removed, please? Thanks, Scott

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Ihar as *-aas core reviewer

The cleanup was my fault. I had removed folks that were added initially just for the initial *aas split. Welcome back. :-) Thanks, doug > On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:33 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > > Sean M. Collins wrote: > >> I probably speak for all

[openstack-dev] [Infra] upcoming review.openstack.org IP address change

Hello from Infra. It's that time again... on Monday, April 11, 2016 20:00 UTC, the OpenStack Project Infrastructure team is increasing the memory on the server which review.openstack.org runs, and that means a new virtual machine instance with new IP addresses assigned by our service provider.

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs] [api] Why WADL when you can Swagger

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > Ok, I'm responding very late to this thread because other bits of the > release cycle had attention. > > A couple of questions. > > 1) why are we using the JSON version of the specification instead of the > YAML one - > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Ihar as *-aas core reviewer

+1 Glad to have Ihar in *aaS. Much needed help! Thanks, German On 3/10/16, 7:34 AM, "Brandon Logan" wrote: >I had the same assumption! Either way, welcome Ihar, your skills and >wisdom will be a great benefit. > >Thanks, >Brandon > >On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 10:33

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Thomas Herve wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 03/10/2016 08:40 AM, Thomas Herve wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Dent > wrote: > >>> +many. It would

Re: [openstack-dev] The #openstack-packaging channel requires an invite?

On 2016-03-10 14:48:50 + (+), Kiall Mac Innes wrote: > For anyone who may try doing this again in the future, don't set the > invite only flag (+i), and > then the +f #openstack-stable will trigger a redirect to the new channel. This was intentional. It was left without -i for a period of

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] patches that improve code quality

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 03/10/2016 03:35 AM, Markus Zoeller wrote: > Agreed, bug reports are *not* a way to document technical debt. > They should be used for documenting faulty behavior which can hit > downstream consumers. > > I also have the feeling that

Re: [openstack-dev] Branch miss-match between server and client in Kilo

On 3/10/2016 9:04 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 3/9/2016 10:16 PM, Janki Chhatbar wrote: Hi All Greetings for the day! I have noticed that while installing*OpenStack Kilo* using DevStack, the server components cloned are stable/kilo whereas the client components cloned are master. This

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Ihar as *-aas core reviewer

I had the same assumption! Either way, welcome Ihar, your skills and wisdom will be a great benefit. Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 10:33 +0100, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Sean M. Collins wrote: > > > I probably speak for all FwaaS cores when I say - "Welcome!” > >

Re: [openstack-dev] The #openstack-packaging channel requires an invite?

On 03/10/2016 10:02 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 3/10/2016 7:53 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 03/09/2016 12:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >>> Someone showed up in the -stable channel this morning asking for help >>> with packaging. I gather they were there because the IRC wiki [1] says >>>

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Release notes etherpad

Hi TripleO, I've started an etherpad to collect all of the major features that we completed in Mitaka. If you've worked on any major/minor features that you'd like to see go into an official release notes doc could you please add it here along with a detailed description:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] enabling third party CI

This is something I would love to enable as well. One of the requirements we have with Midonet is to be able to parametrize the image build, since we need to add extra packages on it. For the deployment options, I also think that it should not be hard either. If you want to discuss it in any

Re: [openstack-dev] The #openstack-packaging channel requires an invite?

On 3/10/2016 7:53 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: On 03/09/2016 12:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: Someone showed up in the -stable channel this morning asking for help with packaging. I gather they were there because the IRC wiki [1] says the #openstack-stable channel is also for packaging discussions,

Re: [openstack-dev] Branch miss-match between server and client in Kilo

On 3/9/2016 10:16 PM, Janki Chhatbar wrote: Hi All Greetings for the day! I have noticed that while installing*OpenStack Kilo* using DevStack, the server components cloned are stable/kilo whereas the client components cloned are master. This leads to errors in installation or commands

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] enabling third party CI

Something I like in TripleO is third party drivers enablement, thanks to the plug-able interface in Puppet modules & Heat Templates. Though I don't see any testing regarding these drivers, it sounds like we add a lot of parameters and Puppet code that is supposed to deploy the drivers, but we

Re: [openstack-dev] The #openstack-packaging channel requires an invite?

On 09/03/16 17:57, Louis Taylor wrote: > From ChanServ: > > 17:55:03 -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Information on #openstack-packaging: > 17:55:03 -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Registered : Nov 11 18:59:55 > 2011 (4y 17w 0d ago) > 17:55:03 -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Last used : (about 75

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

+1 from me too On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Sergey Reshetnyak wrote: > +1 from me. > > Patches looks good. > > 2016-03-10 17:14 GMT+03:00 Chad Roberts : > >> I am +1 for the FFE. Unlikely to break anything else and it freshens-up >> a plugin.

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

+1 from me. Patches looks good. 2016-03-10 17:14 GMT+03:00 Chad Roberts : > I am +1 for the FFE. Unlikely to break anything else and it freshens-up a > plugin. > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Grigoriy Roghkov > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Untill

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

I am +1 for the FFE. Unlikely to break anything else and it freshens-up a plugin. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Grigoriy Roghkov wrote: > Hi, > > Untill release of MapR 5.1.0 I couldn't have it added to sahara. > The release happened this day and 5.1.0 still can be

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/10/2016 08:40 AM, Thomas Herve wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Dent wrote: >>> +many. It would be great if we just got rid of the runnable web >>> servers in the projects and just

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs] [api] Why WADL when you can Swagger

Ok, I'm responding very late to this thread because other bits of the release cycle had attention. A couple of questions. 1) why are we using the JSON version of the specification instead of the YAML one - https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/master/versions/2.0.md#format One of

[openstack-dev] [taas] gate failure fixes

hi, currently our gate is suffering from multiple issues. the following steps are necessary to fix them without disabling gate jobs: 1. merge this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290946/ 2. wait for a fwaas fix being merged: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290983/ (or bug 124 fixed in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10 2016, Thomas Herve wrote: > Isn't devstack meant for development? Running the APIs in a WSGI > container like Apache or uwsgi makes for a terrible debugging > experience. Just this morning I had to prevent aodh from running in > Apache to be able to run it standalone. That

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 03/10/2016 08:40 AM, Thomas Herve wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Dent wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> These are HTTP services. They really shoudn't be claiming new ports, >>> they should be running on a real webserver on 80 or

[openstack-dev] [sahara] Feature Freeze Exception Request for blueprint

Hi, Untill release of MapR 5.1.0 I couldn't have it added to sahara. The release happened this day and 5.1.0 still can be add in Mitaka release. There are two patches to be merged: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286738/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286756/ I want to request an FFE for

Re: [openstack-dev] The #openstack-packaging channel requires an invite?

On 03/09/2016 12:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > Someone showed up in the -stable channel this morning asking for help > with packaging. I gather they were there because the IRC wiki [1] says > the #openstack-stable channel is also for packaging discussions, given > -stable originated from distro

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Well, what about tomorrow? On SCF we create stable branches and master is open for next release. You probably will want to run those tests against Fuel 10, and FPB's master won't have that "10" release in examples metadata. Because it's something that we usually don't want to release, and FPB

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Sean Dague wrote: > >> These are HTTP services. They really shoudn't be claiming new ports, >> they should be running on a real webserver on 80 or 443. >> >> There is some legacy there with the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 10/03/16 13:28 +, Chris Dent wrote: On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Sean Dague wrote: These are HTTP services. They really shoudn't be claiming new ports, they should be running on a real webserver on 80 or 443. There is some legacy there with the original services that we are churning through.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Sean Dague wrote: These are HTTP services. They really shoudn't be claiming new ports, they should be running on a real webserver on 80 or 443. There is some legacy there with the original services that we are churning through. It would be nice if new services *started*

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On 09/03/2016 12:26 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions from which > we will create stable/mitaka branches, and need each team to sign off on > the versions. If you know you

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

Excerpts from Qi Ming Teng's message of 2016-03-10 16:09:43 +0800: > > Hi, > > Looks like the python-senlinclient is missing from the list: The list only included projects with the release:manged tag, but I'll be happy to take care of other projects if folks want to propose them here. Doug >

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all][ptl] preparing to create stable/mitaka branches for libraries

On 09/03/2016 17:29, Doug Hellmann wrote: > It's time to start opening the stable branches for libraries. I've > prepared a list of repositories and the proposed versions from which > we will create stable/mitaka branches, and need each team to sign off on > the versions. If you know you intend to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Compatibility of fuel plugins and fuel versions

> Good idea. That should be done despite on any decision we will take. Currently you have to specify which releases your plugin supports [0]. So I can take my plugin developed for 8.0 and install it on Fuel-9.0 (I actually did it and it worked just fine). But I won't be able to enable this plugin

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

On 03/10/2016 07:11 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > From: Sylvain Bauza > > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > > Date: Thursday 10 March

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][zaqar][cloudkitty] Default ports list

From: Sylvain Bauza > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > Date: Thursday 10 March 2016 at 10:04 To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][tempest] When to put a test into the smoke suite?

On 03/10/2016 04:50 AM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: > Hi, > > I tried to find the rules defining which test qualifies to be in the smoke > suite of tempest. Is there such a clear definition somewhere? There isn't a huge formal set of rules. The guidelines though are that it's short and/or

  1   2   >