Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Nomination Oleksii Chuprykov to Heat core reviewer

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 01:57:34PM +0300, Sergey Kraynev wrote: > Hi Heaters, > > The Mitaka release is close to finish, so it's good time for reviewing > results of work. > One of this results is analyze contribution results for the last release > cycle. > According to the data [1] we have one g

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas -- service vs. library

NO : For any kind of extra quota service. In other places I saw other reasons for a quota service or similar, the actual cost of this approach is higher than most people would think so NO. Maybe Library, But I do not want to see for example the bad pattern used in nova to spread everywhere.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Nomination Oleksii Chuprykov to Heat core reviewer

+1 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Sergey Kraynev wrote: > Hi Heaters, > > The Mitaka release is close to finish, so it's good time for reviewing > results of work. > One of this results is analyze contribution results for the last release > cycle. > According to the data [1] we have one good c

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Nomination Oleksii Chuprykov to Heat core reviewer

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Sergey Kraynev wrote: > Hi Heaters, > > The Mitaka release is close to finish, so it's good time for reviewing > results of work. > One of this results is analyze contribution results for the last release > cycle. > According to the data [1] we have one good cand

[openstack-dev] [Heat] Nomination Oleksii Chuprykov to Heat core reviewer

Hi Heaters, The Mitaka release is close to finish, so it's good time for reviewing results of work. One of this results is analyze contribution results for the last release cycle. According to the data [1] we have one good candidate for nomination to core-review team: Oleksii Chuprykov. During thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Getting rid of cluster status

Folks As I generally support the idea of getting rid of cluster status, this requires thorough design. My opinion here is that we should leave it as a function of nodes state until we come up with a variant of better calculation of cluster status. Nevertheless it is true that cluster status is act

Re: [openstack-dev] [packstack] Update packstack core list

- Original Message - > 2016-03-16 11:23 GMT+01:00 Lukas Bezdicka : > >> ... > >> - Martin Mágr > >> - Iván Chavero > >> - Javier Peña > >> - Alan Pevec > >> > >> I have a doubt about Lukas, he's contributed an awful lot to > >> Packstack, just not over the last 90 days. Lukas, will you be

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [ironic] [inspector] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

On 03/15/2016 01:53 PM, Serge Kovaleff wrote: Dear All, Let's compare functional abilities of both solutions. Till the recent Mitaka release Ironic-inspector had only Introspection ability. Discovery part is proposed and implemented by Anton Arefiev. We should align expectations and current an

Re: [openstack-dev] [packstack] Update packstack core list

2016-03-16 11:23 GMT+01:00 Lukas Bezdicka : >> ... >> - Martin Mágr >> - Iván Chavero >> - Javier Peña >> - Alan Pevec >> >> I have a doubt about Lukas, he's contributed an awful lot to >> Packstack, just not over the last 90 days. Lukas, will you be >> contributing in the future? If so, I'd includ

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleO][Neutron] neutron-lbaas agent service placement

Thanks Ben. On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > On 03/14/2016 10:18 AM, Qasim Sarfraz wrote: > > Hi Triple-O folks, > > > > I was planning to enable neutron-lbaas-agent on a overcloud deployment > > but couldn't find any useful documentation. Can someone please point me > > to t

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Wishlist bugs == (trivial) blueprint?

Sean Dague wrote: It's a trade off. Would you rather keep Wishlist mechanism and have ~30 extra bugs in every release, and have to hunt for a new bug lead twice as often? That's my gut feel on the break down here. To get the bug backlog under control, we have to make hard calls here. This is one

Re: [openstack-dev] [packstack] Update packstack core list

On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 06:41 -0500, Javier Pena wrote: > > Hi, > > > > [post originally sent on RDO-list but I've been told I should use > > this > > channel] > > > > I've looked at packstack core-list [1] and I suggest we revisit to > > keep > > only active contributors [2] in the core members li

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleO][Neutron] neutron-lbaas agent service placement

Thanks Nir for pointing that out [1]. I am considering moving to LBaaSv2 moving forward. Also, Response inline for the other questions. [1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286381 [2] - http://docs.openstack.org/ha-guide/controller-ha-haproxy.html On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Nir Magnezi

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas -- service vs. library

On 03/16/2016 05:46 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote: > On 16 March 2016 at 09:15, Tim Bell > wrote: > > Then, there were major reservations from the PTLs at the impacts in > terms of > latency, ability to reconcile and loss of control (transactions are > difficult

[openstack-dev] [all] Newton Design Summit - Proposed slot allocation

Hi PTLs, Here is the proposed slot allocation for project teams at the Newton Design Summit in Austin. This is based on the requests the mitaka PTLs have made, space availability and project activity & collaboration needs. | fb: fishbowl 40-min slots | wr: workroom 40-min slots | cm: Friday c

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] rabbitmq / ipv6 issue

On 16 March 2016 at 02:41, Emilien Macchi wrote: > I did some testing again and I'm still running in curl issues: > http://paste.openstack.org/show/BU7UY0mUrxoMUGDhXgWs/ > > I'll continue investigation tomorrow. btw, tripleo-ci seems to be doing reasonably well this morning, I don't see any failu

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas -- service vs. library

On 16 March 2016 at 09:15, Tim Bell wrote: Then, there were major reservations from the PTLs at the impacts in terms of > latency, ability to reconcile and loss of control (transactions are > difficult, transactions > across services more so). > > Not just PTLs :-) > > I would favor a library,

[openstack-dev] [magnum-ui] Reorganization of Magnum-UI Driver

Hi Bradley Jones, I propose reorganization of "Magnum-UI Drivers" on Launchpad for Magnum-UI. The team can contain magnum core members and magnum-ui core members. Also review the following patch, please. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289584/ So I suggest cutting the mitaka release until existi

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][taas] Proposal of Dashboard for TaaS

Just to make sure you're aware of that - there is this new Curvature Network Topology view since Liberty [1]. Maybe you want to integrate with it as well... [1] https://www.openstack.org/software/liberty/ -- - Andreas (IRC: scheuran) On Mi, 2016-03-16 at 12:30 +0900, Soichi Shigeta wrote:

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

Tony Breeds wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 06:28:14PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: The second issue is that we don't have any way to run an election on the project, since we don't have a way to determine "contributors" (or rather, the only voter and potential candidate under those rules would b

Re: [openstack-dev] [Rally] single router per tenant in network context

Hi, network context creates router for each network automatically, so you can not reduce the number of routers with this context https://github.com/openstack/rally/blob/master/rally/plugins/openstack/context/network/networks.py#L79 However you can create and use own network context plugin, inheri

[openstack-dev] [jacket] Introduction to jacket, a new project

Hi all, There is a new project "jacket" to manage multiply clouds. The jacket wiki is: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Jacket Please review it and give your comments. Thanks. Best Regards, Kevin (Sen Zhang) __ OpenStack De

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas -- service vs. library

Nikhil, Thank you for rising this question. IMHO quotas should be moved into separated services (this is right micro services approach). It will make a lot of things simpler: 1) this removes a lot of logic/code from projects 2) cross project atomic quotas reservation (will be possible) (e.g.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Wishlist bugs == (trivial) blueprint?

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:59:32PM +, Tim Bell wrote: [...] > The bug process was very light weight for an operator who found > something they would like enhanced. It could be done through the web > and did not require git/gerrit knowledge. I went through the process > for a change: > > - Re

Re: [openstack-dev] [cross-project] [all] Quotas -- service vs. library

On 16/03/16 07:25, "Nikhil Komawar" wrote: >Hello everyone, > >tl;dr; >I'm writing to request some feedback on whether the cross project Quotas >work should move ahead as a service or a library or going to a far >extent I'd ask should this even be in a common repository, would >projects prefer