Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] Meeting Times - change to office hours?

2018-04-23 13:11 GMT+02:00 Graham Hayes : > Hi All, > > We moved our meeting time to 14:00UTC on Wednesdays, but attendance > has been low, and it is also the middle of the night for one of our > cores. > > I would like to suggest we have an office hours style meeting, with > one in

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Community Meeting tomorrow (2018-04-24)

Greetings, Tomorrow the CI team will be hosting its weekly Community Meeting. We welcome any/all to join. The meeting is a place to discuss any concerns / questions / issues from the community regarding CI. It will (as usual) be held immediately following the general #tripleo meeting on

Re: [openstack-dev] [masakari] Introspective Instance Monitoring through QEMU Guest Agent

Hi Louie, Thanks for bring this up. I add this topic to today's meeting agenda. --- Regards, Sampath On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 5:15 AM, Kwan, Louie wrote: > Submitted the following review on January 17, 2018, > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534958/ > > Would

[openstack-dev] Public Cloud WG PTG Summary

Hi team, Sorry for this long overdue summary. During the Dublin PTG as a WG we held two successful discussion sessions on Mon and Tues, and below are the conclusions for this year's planning as far as I could recall. Please feel free to provide further feedback :) - Passport Program v2

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] roadmap on containers workflow

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 07:24:58PM -0700, Emilien Macchi wrote: > This patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/561377 is deploying Docker and > Docker Registry v2 *before* containers deployment in the docker_steps. > It's using the external_deploy_tasks interface that runs right after the >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Doug Hellmann wrote: > I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts teams are > making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems to be working or > not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding new techniques by > experimenting within one team and then adapting the

Re: [openstack-dev] [All][Election] Rocky TC Election Voting Begins!

On 2018-04-24 00:03:55 + (+), Kendall Nelson wrote: > The poll for the TC Election is now open and will remain open > until Apr 30, 2018 23:45 UTC. [...] In finest OpenStack scaling tradition, we seem to have overloaded CIVS with the volume of ballots we wanted to send and so ended up

[openstack-dev] [All][Election] Rocky TC Election Voting Begins!

Hello Everyone! The poll for the TC Election is now open and will remain open until Apr 30, 2018 23:45 UTC. We are selecting 7 TC members, please rank all candidates in your order of preference. You are eligible to vote if you are a Foundation individual member[1] that also has committed to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

One more I'll add which is touched on a little below. Contributors spawn from a healthy Userbase/Operatorbase. If their needs are not met, then they go elsewhere and the contributor base shrinks. OpenStack has created artificial walls between the various Projects. It shows up, for example, as

[openstack-dev] [ironic] this week's priorities and subteam reports

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) Weekly priorities

Re: [openstack-dev] [rally][dragonflow][ec2-api][PowerVMStackers][murano] Tagging rights

Excerpts from Andrey Pavlov's message of 2018-04-23 21:42:56 +0300: > Hello Sean, > > EC2-api team always used manual tagging because I know only this procedure. > I thought that it's more convenient for me cause I can manage > commits/branches. > But in fact I don't mind to switch to automatic

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

> > 1. Fail in the API saying you can't rebuild with a new image with new > required traits. Pros: - Simple way to keep the new image off a host that doesn't support it. > - Similar solution to volume-backed rebuild with a new image. Cons: - Confusing user experience since they might be able

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

On 2018-04-23 16:56:28 -0500 (-0500), Sean McGinnis wrote: [...] > I think Howard had an excellent idea of the TC coming up with > themes for each cycle. I think that could be used to create a good > cadence or focus to make sure we are making progress in key areas. > > It struck me that we came

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

> for the GET > /resource_providers?in_tree==, nested > resource providers and allocation pose a problem see #3 above. This *would* work as a quick up-front check as Jay described (if you get no results from this, you know that at least one of your image traits doesn't exist anywhere in the tree)

[openstack-dev] ​ [mistral] timeout and retry

Hi Renat, Can you explain me and Dougal how timeout policy should work with retry policy? I guess there is bug right now. The behaviour is something like this https://ibb.co/hhm0eH Example: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/563759/ Logs:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

> > If you think the TC should tend to be more active in driving change > than it is today, please describe the changes (policy, culture, > etc.) you think would need to be made to do that effectively (not > which policies you want us to be more active on, but *how* to > organize the TC to be

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

Thanks for the detailed options Matt/eric/jay. Just few of my thoughts, For #1, we can make the explanation very clear that we rejected the request because the original traits specified in the original image and the new traits specified in the new image do not match and hence rebuild is not

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

On 04/23/2018 03:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: We seem to be at a bit of an impasse in this spec amendment [1] so I want to try and summarize the alternative solutions as I see them. The overall goal of the blueprint is to allow defining traits via image properties, like flavor extra specs.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Proposing Marius Cornea core on upgrade bits

Thanks everyone for your positive feedback. I've updated Gerrit! Welcome Marius and thanks again for your hard work! On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 4:55 AM, James Slagle wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Emilien Macchi > wrote: > > Greetings, > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Proposing Marius Cornea core on upgrade bits

+1 On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 5:55 AM, James Slagle wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> As you probably know mcornea on IRC, Marius Cornea has been contributing on >> TripleO for a while, specially on the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

Following the discussion on IRC, here's what I think you need to do: - Assuming the set of traits from your new image is called image_traits... - Use GET /allocations/{instance_uuid} and pull out the set of all RP UUIDs. Let's call this instance_rp_uuids. - Use the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

> > Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of > companies and individuals contributing to OpenStack. At the same > time we have started seeing contributions from other companies and > individuals. To some degree this contraction and shift in contributor > base is a natural

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

On 4/23/2018 3:26 PM, Eric Fried wrote: No, the question you're really asking in this case is, "Do the resource providers in this tree contain (or not contain) these traits?" Which to me, translates directly to: GET /resource_providers?in_tree=$rp_uuid={$TRAIT|!$TRAIT, ...} ...which we

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 23/04/18 10:06, Doug Hellmann wrote: [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] Over the last year we have seen some

[openstack-dev] [nova] Do we need bp/list-show-all-server-migration-types?

Looking over the things in the runways queue [1], excluding the zVM driver (because I'm not sure what the status is on that thread), the next in line is blueprint list-show-all-server-migration-types [2]. I know this has been approved since Pike, but I wanted to raise some questions again [3]

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > understand their positions before considering how to vote in the > ongoing

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

Semantically, GET /allocation_candidates where we don't actually want to allocate anything (i.e. we don't want to use the returned candidates) is goofy, and talking about what the result would look like when there's no `resources` is going to spider into some weird questions. Like what does the

[openstack-dev] [masakari] Introspective Instance Monitoring through QEMU Guest Agent

Submitted the following review on January 17, 2018, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/534958/ Would like to know who else could be on the reviewer list ? or anything else is needed for the next step? Also, I am planning to attend our coming Masakari Weekly meeting, April 24, 0400 UTC in

[openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Ceilometer-file-publisher-compression-csv-format

Submitted the following review on April 19, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/562768/ Would like to know who else could be on the reviewer list and anything else for the next step? Thanks. Louie __ OpenStack Development

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Release of openstack/xstatic-angular-vis failed

On 2018-04-23 21:45, Sean McGinnis wrote: > See below for logs from a failed xstatic release job. It appears something is > not set up right with this job. > > "can't open file 'xstatic_check_version.py': [Errno 2] No such file or > directory" > > I missed it initially, but this release did not

[openstack-dev] [os-upstream-institute] Prep call for Vancouver today

Hi Training Team, It is a friendly reminder that we will have a conference call on Zoom today at 2200 UTC as opposed to the weekly meeting to better sync up before the training in Vancouver. You can find the call details here:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat][TripleO] - Getting attributes of openstack resources not created by the stack for TripleO NetworkConfig.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Dan Sneddon wrote: > We could add the ControlPlaneDefaultRoute and ControlPlaneSubnetCidr to > network_data.yaml, but this would involve some duplication of configuration > data, since those are currently defined in undercloud.conf. A more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat][TripleO] - Getting attributes of openstack resources not created by the stack for TripleO NetworkConfig.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Harald Jensås wrote: > On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: >> To make it clear, what you want to prevent is the need to add more >> keys in network_data.yaml? >> >> As those had to be provided at some point, I wonder if

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] September PTG in Denver

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:32:40PM +, Kendall Nelson wrote: > Hey Dougal, > > I think I had said May 2nd in my initial email asking about attendance. If > you can get an answer out of your team by then I would greatly appreciate > it! If you need more time please let me know by then (May 2nd)

[openstack-dev] [nova][placement] Trying to summarize bp/glance-image-traits scheduling alternatives for rebuild

We seem to be at a bit of an impasse in this spec amendment [1] so I want to try and summarize the alternative solutions as I see them. The overall goal of the blueprint is to allow defining traits via image properties, like flavor extra specs. Those image-defined traits are used to filter

[openstack-dev] [horizon] Release of openstack/xstatic-angular-vis failed

See below for logs from a failed xstatic release job. It appears something is not set up right with this job. "can't open file 'xstatic_check_version.py': [Errno 2] No such file or directory" I missed it initially, but this release did not actually contain any functional change, so I think it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral] September PTG in Denver

Hey Dougal, I think I had said May 2nd in my initial email asking about attendance. If you can get an answer out of your team by then I would greatly appreciate it! If you need more time please let me know by then (May 2nd) instead. -Kendall (diablo_rojo) On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 8:17 AM Dougal

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 2018-04-23 16:28:13 + (+), Tim Bell wrote: > One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from > lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource > opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projects, > government funded projects) and there is a latency

[openstack-dev] [rally][dragonflow][ec2-api][PowerVMStackers][murano] Tagging rights

Hello Sean, EC2-api team always used manual tagging because I know only this procedure. I thought that it's more convenient for me cause I can manage commits/branches. But in fact I don't mind to switch to automatic scheme. If somethig else is needed from please let me know. Regards, Andrey

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 4/23/2018 1:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: Some of us also urged existing leaders in various projects to record videos encouraging contributors to get more involved by demystifying processes like code review or bug triage. This could be as simple as signing up for an available lightning talk

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

On 23/04/18 09:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] We frequently have discussions about

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

2018-04-24 1:26 GMT+08:00 Doug Hellmann : > > Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-24 00:54:14 +0800: > > ** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to > > OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source projects?To > > fully

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 2018-04-23 13:18:22 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: [...] > I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts > teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems > to be working or not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding > new techniques by

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

On 23/04/18 14:27, Doug Hellmann wrote: > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > understand their positions before considering how to vote in the > ongoing election.] > > We frequently have

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat][TripleO] - Getting attributes of openstack resources not created by the stack for TripleO NetworkConfig.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Harald Jensås wrote: > On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Harald Jensås > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Hi, thanks for sending this. Responses inline. > > > > > When

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

2018-04-23 22:43 GMT+08:00 Doug Hellmann : > > Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-22 16:50:51 +0800: > > Thanks, Doug, for raising this campaign question > > > > > > Here are my answers: > > > > > > ***How you would evaluate a project's application in general > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2018-04-23 12:35:07 -0500: > On 4/23/2018 12:18 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts > > teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems > > to be working or not. In the past we've

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

*IMO TC should be more active as possible. Since we try to use this position to make policies, we should also consider hard how we can broadcast those policies to each developer to provide guidelines and to get possible feedbacks.To reach out current/potential technical contributors, to sell this

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 4/23/2018 12:18 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: I would like for us to collect some more data about what efforts teams are making with encouraging new contributors, and what seems to be working or not. In the past we've done pretty well at finding new techniques by experimenting within one team and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 23/04/18 18:14, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 17:23:20 +0100: >> On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100: On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Graham

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-24 00:54:14 +0800: > ** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to > OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source projects?To > fully understand the map of OpenStack services is a huge challenge, > especially for new

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 2018-04-23 13:14:59 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: [...] > I hope that no one considers any of this "noise," so thank you for > highlighting that point. Oh, yes I didn't mean to imply that any of the responses so far have been noise, but I was walking a thin line on it being a hollow sort

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 17:50:31 +0100: > On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Tim Bell wrote: > > > One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from > > lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource > > opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat][TripleO] - Getting attributes of openstack resources not created by the stack for TripleO NetworkConfig.

On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 14:44 +0200, Thomas Herve wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Harald Jensås > wrote: > > Hi, > > Hi, thanks for sending this. Responses inline. > > > When configuring TripleO deployments with nodes on routed ctlplane > > networks we need to pass

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2018-04-23 17:02:07 +: > On 2018-04-23 12:02:14 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote: > [...] > > The main thing I will be looking out for in those cases is that > > the project followed the Four Opens *from the beginning*. Projects > > that start from a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 17:23:20 +0100: > On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100: > >> On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 12:09:42 +0100: I'd like to see us work harder to refine the long term goals we are trying to satisfy with the projects that make up OpenStack. This will require us to continue the never-ending discussion

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 2018-04-23 12:02:14 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote: [...] > The main thing I will be looking out for in those cases is that > the project followed the Four Opens *from the beginning*. Projects > that start from a code dump are much less likely to attract other > contributors in my view. Open

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

*Thanks, Doug for bringing out this campaign questionI think we have a start now with providing a decent map to show services in OpenStack and fill in with projects. What we should have and will be nice is to ask projects to search through the map (with a brief introduction of services) when

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

** What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to OpenStackmore difficult than contributing to other open source projects?To fully understand the map of OpenStack services is a huge challenge, especially for new join developers. And for project teams, might not provide new

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Tim Bell wrote: One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projects, government funded projects) and there is a latency in current system to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

On 23/04/18 09:50, Doug Hellmann wrote: [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] In the course of evaluating new

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote: What aspects of our policies or culture make contributing to OpenStack more difficult than contributing to other open source projects? Size, isolation, and perfectionism. Size in at least three dimensions: * the entire community * individual

[openstack-dev] Catching missing or stale package requirements in requirements.txt

Hi Folks, Some of the Oslo libraries have a tox test that does the above [0]. This ensures that our requirements.txt file is kept current with the code. This test uses a tool called pip_check_reqs [1]. Unfortunately this tool is not compatible with pip version 10, and it appears as if the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

One of the challenges in the academic sector is the time from lightbulb moment to code commit. Many of the academic resource opportunities are short term (e.g. PhDs, student projects, government funded projects) and there is a latency in current system to onboard, get the appropriate

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 23/04/18 17:14, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100: >> On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100: 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Without letting

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

On 23/04/18 14:50, Doug Hellmann wrote: > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > understand their positions before considering how to vote in the > ongoing election.] > > In the course of

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2018-04-22 15:10:40 +0200: >> For the product fit, there is also a lot of room for interpretation. For >> me it boils down to whether "OpenStack" (the product) is better with >> that project "in" rather than with that project "out".

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 16:27:04 +0100: > On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100: > >> 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> > >>> Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Doug Hellmann wrote: > Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of > companies and individuals contributing to OpenStack. At the same > time we have started seeing contributions from other companies and > individuals. To some degree this contraction and shift in contributor >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote: Where do you draw the line at "gratuitous"? What benefits and drawbacks do you see in supporting multiple tools with similar features? How would our community be different, in positive and negative ways, if we were more strict about avoiding such

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 20/04/18 17:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] Thanks Doug, I think this is a

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Monthly bug day?

100% on board with this, I think it was really productive! Sam On 23/04/2018, 15:44, "Jim Rollenhagen" > wrote: On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Michael Turek > wrote: Hey

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

> > > > I think one of the important things is if it fits in to furthering what is > > "OpenStack", as far as whether it is a service or functionality that is > > needed > > and useful for those running an OpenStack cloud. This is one of the parts > > that > > may be more on the subjective

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote: We frequently have discussions about whether the TC is active enough, in terms of driving new policies, technology choices, and other issues that affect the entire community. Another good question. Like all the others I wish they had come a bit

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

On 23/04/18 16:04, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100: >> 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >>> Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a discussion >>> of Adjutant's case, please talk a little about how you would

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

On 23/04/18 15:06, Doug Hellmann wrote: > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > understand their positions before considering how to vote in the > ongoing election.] > > Over the last year we have

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Topics for the Board+TC+UC meeting in Vancouver

On 2018-04-23 15:36:32 +0100 (+0100), Graham Hayes wrote: > I think as an add on to this, would to ask the board to talk to members > and see what contributions they have made to the technical side of > OpenStack. > > This should not just be Number of commits / reviews / bugs etc but > also the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Topics for the Board+TC+UC meeting in Vancouver

Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 15:36:32 +0100: > On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > >> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that > >> meeting ? > > > > The topics: > > > > 1. What are we to do,

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Graham Hayes's message of 2018-04-23 12:15:24 +0100: > 7On 20/04/18 22:26, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Without letting the conversation devolve too much into a discussion > > of Adjutant's case, please talk a little about how you would evaluate > > a project's application in general.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

Doug Hellmann wrote: > Where do you draw the line at "gratuitous"? The way I interpret "gratuitous" here is: is the new project using a technically-different approach to the same problem, or is it just another group working at the same problem in the same way ? Is the new project just a way to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-04-23 12:09:42 +0100: > On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > > understand their positions before

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2018-04-22 21:01:46 -0500: > > > > We are discussing adding at least one new project this cycle, and > > the specific case of Adjutant has brought up questions about the > > criteria we use for evaluating new projects when they apply to > > become

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2018-04-22 15:10:40 +0200: > Doug Hellmann wrote: > > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking > > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community > > understand their positions before considering how to vote

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Topics for the Board+TC+UC meeting in Vancouver

big +1 to Graham's suggestion On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Graham Hayes wrote: > On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > >> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that > >> meeting ? > > > > The topics:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

I think it actually relies upon the new team to actively reaching out to the existing team. The new team cannot be lazy and wait for something happen for them, they have to keep reaching out and believe me the core developers from the existing official project will lend a hand in the end :) For

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Rico Lin's message of 2018-04-22 16:50:51 +0800: > Thanks, Doug, for raising this campaign question > > > Here are my answers: > > > ***How you would evaluate a project's application in general > > First I would work through the requirements ([1]) to evaluate projects. > Since

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Monthly bug day?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Michael Turek wrote: > Hey everyone! > > We had a bug day about two weeks ago and it went pretty well! At last > week's IRC meeting the idea of having one every month was thrown around. > > What does everyone think about having Bug Day

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

Doug Hellmann wrote: > [...] > Please describe one case where we were either active or reactive > and how that was shown to be the right choice over time. I think that the work on documenting our key principles was proactive, and it really helped to set expectations for new people in our

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

I don't have specific ideas now, but it would be great to have TC publish something like a new direction outlook per cycle or per year, to summarize that these x,y,z new areas are what the OpenStack Technical Committee considers worth exploring for new directions and we will sponsor projects that

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question related to new projects

Excerpts from Zhipeng Huang's message of 2018-04-21 07:06:30 +0800: > As the one who just lead a new project into governance last year, I think I > could take a first stab at it. > > For me the current requirements in general works fine, as I emphasized in > my recent blog [0], the four opens are

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Topics for the Board+TC+UC meeting in Vancouver

On 18/04/18 11:38, Chris Dent wrote: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> So... Is there any specific topic you think we should cover in that >> meeting ? > > The topics: > > 1. What are we to do, as a community, when external pressures for > results are not matched by contribution

Re: [openstack-dev] [searchlight][release] Searchlight deliverable type

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 09:16:03AM -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > Hello searchlighters, > > The Rocky 1 milestone was last Thursday, and there has been no release request > was submitted for the searchlight deliverables [1]. > > I remember some discussion at the last Denver PTG about searchlight

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

Excerpts from Zhipeng Huang's message of 2018-04-23 21:50:15 +0800: > In general I would prefer TC take an active role regarding exploring new > use cases and technology directions leverage the existing OpenStack > infrastructure. I would against TC being too active on project level > governance.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

Culture wise, being too IRC-centric is definitely not helping, from my own experience getting new Cyborg developer joining our weekly meeting from China. Well we could always argue it is part of a open source/hacker culture and preferable to commercial solutions that have the constant risk of

[openstack-dev] [searchlight][release] Searchlight deliverable type

Hello searchlighters, The Rocky 1 milestone was last Thursday, and there has been no release request was submitted for the searchlight deliverables [1]. I remember some discussion at the last Denver PTG about searchlight and that it is basically considered "code complete" at this point until any

[openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How can we make contributing to OpenStack easier?

[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] Over the last year we have seen some contraction in the number of companies

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

I think this depends on the nature of the project. For deployment tools, as we also have witnessed in OPNFV, it tends to have multiple solutions. So it is normal to have multiple such projects although they are solving the same problem generally speaking. For projects that has a clear definition

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How "active" should the TC be?

In general I would prefer TC take an active role regarding exploring new use cases and technology directions leverage the existing OpenStack infrastructure. I would against TC being too active on project level governance. For example we have been discussing about edge computing recently and we

[openstack-dev] [tc] campaign question: How should we handle projects with overlapping feature sets?

[This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community understand their positions before considering how to vote in the ongoing election.] In the course of evaluating new projects that have asked to join as official

  1   2   >