Re: [openstack-dev] [stackalytics]many projects missing in the "others" category

On 05/03/2016 09:11 AM, joehuang wrote: > Hello, > > Very sad to know that some projects are missing again in the "others" > category. When I want to cite some statistic data for Tricircle core reviewer > nomination, can't find the data for many "others" projects which usually are > listed

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Could you tell me the best way to develop openstack in Windows?

On 05/02/2016 04:20 AM, 박준하 wrote: > Hi forks, > > > > I’m beginner about Openstack developments. I’ve been really interested in > to know about Openstack and wanted to modify and test it. > > > > But I’m using PyCharm in the Windows 7 but, It’s very hard to programming > and testing when

[openstack-dev] Thank you to our Event Planners

I would like to take a moment to say thank you to all the folks in our community who take the time and trouble to plan events for all of us to enjoy. Events of all kinds help us to learn and grow by extending ourselves and learning about different ways of doing things. We get to interact with new

Re: [openstack-dev] summit tools

On 04/20/2016 06:53 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 04:13:38PM +, Neil Jerram wrote: >> A couple of questions about our Austin-related planning tools... >> >> - Can one's calendar at >> https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/#day=2016-04-25 >> be

Re: [openstack-dev] Question about OpenStack Code of Conduct

On 04/21/2016 02:04 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-04-21 17:54:56 + (+), Adrian Otto wrote: >> Below is an excerpt from: >> https://www.openstack.org/legal/community-code-of-conduct/ >> >> "When we disagree, we consult others. Disagreements, both social >> and technical, happen all

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Newton midcycle planning

On 04/14/2016 08:52 PM, Bhandaru, Malini K wrote: > Hello Michael! > > Quite recently David Lyle hosted the Horizon Mid cycle at Intel Portland > offices – they enjoyed getting out and dinning in the cafeteria. > Internet accounts were set up ahead of schedule but IRC still was an issue. > We

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Newton Midcycle Planning

On 04/12/2016 07:21 PM, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > Sean, > > Thanks for getting the discussion started. > > I think R-14 might be a little tricky leading up to the 4th of July > weekend. > > It seems like R-17 is coming awful quick but could be done. That or > R-11 would be my second vote then.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Newton Design summit schedule - Draft

On 04/12/2016 03:23 PM, Armando M. wrote: > On 12 April 2016 at 12:16, Matt Riedemann > wrote: > >> >> >> On 4/11/2016 11:56 PM, Armando M. wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> A provisional schedulefor the Neutron project is available [1]. I am >>> still working with the

Re: [openstack-dev] Newton design summit etherpad wiki created

On 04/12/2016 01:05 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 04/12/2016 12:45 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> I've stubbed out the newton design summit etherpad wiki so people can >> start populating this now. >> >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Design_Summit/Newton/Etherpads >>

Re: [openstack-dev] Newton design summit etherpad wiki created

On 04/12/2016 12:45 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > I've stubbed out the newton design summit etherpad wiki so people can > start populating this now. > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Design_Summit/Newton/Etherpads > Keep in mind we still haven't fully addressed all the consequences of the wiki

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Newton Midcycle Planning

On 04/12/2016 10:05 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > Hey Cinder team (and those interested), > > We've had a few informal conversations on the channel and in meetings, > but wanted to capture some things here and spread awareness. > > I think it would be good to start planning for our Newton midcycle.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Newton midcycle planning

On 04/11/2016 09:45 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:49:16PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> A few people have been asking about planning for the nova midcycle for >> newton. Looking at the schedule [1] I'm thinking weeks R-15 or R-11 work the >> best. R-14 is close to the US

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Newton midcycle planning

On 04/11/2016 04:49 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > A few people have been asking about planning for the nova midcycle for > newton. Looking at the schedule [1] I'm thinking weeks R-15 or R-11 work > the best. R-14 is close to the US July 4th holiday, R-13 is during the > week of the US July 4th

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 05:53 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 08/04/2016 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: >>> >>> >>> is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the >>> reviews being useless. aside from the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 05:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 04:39 PM, John Dickinson wrote: > > > On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > >> On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes >>> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:28 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > On 04/08/2016 02:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You can see the names and can >> find the emails of those engaged in this by following the gerrit link >> Dims posted in his first post. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:19 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > On 04/08/2016 02:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: >> Are they using the numbers for some internal company purpose maybe? If so, >> how does it matter to any of us? >> >> Chasing this tail just takes time away from useful things, IMO. > > Although I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > >> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : > >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > > There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Results of the TC Election

On 04/08/2016 09:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Eoghan Glynn wrote: >>> However, the turnout continues to slide, dipping below 20% for >>> the first time: >> >>Election | Electorate (delta %) | Votes | Turnout (delta %) >>=== >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Results of the TC Election

On 04/07/2016 08:51 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:03:11AM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: >> Please join me in congratulating the 7 newly elected members of the TC. >> >> << REMOVE UNEEDED > > > *sigh*, clearly this was a templating error and no reflection on the fine >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] -2'ing all patches on every gate breakage

On 04/04/2016 12:01 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Hi all, > > I noticed that often times we go and -2 all the patches in the review > queue on every neutron specific gate breakage spotted. This is allegedly > done to make sure that nothing known to be broken land in merge gate > until we fix the

[openstack-dev] Acknowledging Jim Blair's work on the TC

Jim is an incumbent on the TC this election and he didn't run. I'm posting this to express my thanks to Jim for his work and dedication on the TC. Jim, I think your commitment to open source, spanning many years before OpenStack, and your dedication to governance process, are qualities I admire

[openstack-dev] Searching with the Summit Schdule App

My preference when consuming the schedule for the Design Summit is to see an entire project track in one view. I was unable to figure out how to accomplish this by clicking things on https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/#day=2016-04-27_types=2 (the link ttx had provided for

[openstack-dev] PTL communication of offline time

I proposed a resolution to the TC regarding PTL leave of absences, outlining a workflow of communication: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290141/ The proposal was struck down in favour of a change to the Project Team Guide: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/293170/ I recently was contacted by a

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the Intel SRIOV CI running and if so, what does it test?

On 03/31/2016 10:34 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 03/31/2016 08:31 AM, Znoinski, Waldemar wrote: >> >> >> >-Original Message- >> >From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] >> >Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 4:22 PM >> >To

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the Intel SRIOV CI running and if so, what does it test?

On 03/31/2016 08:31 AM, Znoinski, Waldemar wrote: > > > >-Original Message- > >From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] > >Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 4:22 PM > >To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >

[openstack-dev] [election] [tc] TC candidacy

s. I think there are some good structures in place to foster that communication and I see that as a huge benefit to OpenStack. Thanks for reading. Please read all the candidate platforms and please vote. Anita Kuno. (anteaya) __

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Austin Design Summit track layout

On 03/30/2016 05:24 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > See new version attached. This will be pushed to the official schedule > tomorrow, so please reply here today if you see any major issue with it. > > Changes: > - swapped the release and stable slots to accommodate mriedem > - moved Astara fishbowl

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][infra] The same SRIOV / NFV CI failures missed a regression, why?

On 03/29/2016 08:56 AM, Znoinski, Waldemar wrote: > Hi Jay, Matt, Levi et al, > > The Intel NFV CI problems were fixed last week. > Also, I think if the CIs would have voting right it would attract more > attention. > > I'd be happy to work with OpenStack Infra team on getting our NFV CI the >

[openstack-dev] Bots and Their Effects: Gerrit, IRC, other

Bots are very handy for doing repetitive tasks, we agree on that. Bots also require permissions to execute certain actions, require maintenance to ensure they operate as expected and do create output which is music to some and noise to others. Said output is often archieved somewhere which

Re: [openstack-dev] Newton summit planning etherpad

On 03/22/2016 05:42 PM, Steve Martinelli wrote: > > The summit planning etherpad for Keystone is here: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/keystone-newton-summit-brainstorm > > Please brainstorm / toss ideas up / discuss Newton cycle goals > > Thanks, > > Steve Martinelli > OpenStack Keystone

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] CI jobs take pretty long, can we improve that?

On 03/21/2016 09:48 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:37 PM, Assaf Muller wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Clark Boylan >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016, at 06:15 PM, Assaf Muller wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Clark Boylan

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election][ec2-api][winstackers][stable] status of teams without PTL candidates

On 03/21/2016 01:06 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-03-21 06:14:25 -0400 (-0400), Sean Dague wrote: > [...] >> I'm +1 on Tony for Stable Maint. Though I also think that we >> should rollback any misgivings about election officials running >> for PTL slots. Of our 40 races only 7 (?) were

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election][ec2-api][winstackers][stable] status of teams without PTL candidates

On 03/21/2016 12:33 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> On Mar 21, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Alexandre Levine >> wrote: >> >> Doug, >> >> Let me clarify a bit the situation. >> Before this February there wasn't such a project at all. EC2 API was a >> built-in part of nova so no

Re: [openstack-dev] Somebody posted this on #openstack-meetng-4

On 03/21/2016 11:59 AM, Sukhdev Kapur wrote: > I just noticed that somebody posted this on the above meeting channel. Yes, that took place over the weekend and pleia2 removed that user. Should you see spam occur in irc channels please notify someone in #openstack-infra so they can address the

Re: [openstack-dev] Visa Invitation Letter doesn't contain attachment

On 03/20/2016 10:46 PM, Zhi Chang wrote: > hi, guys. > > I received Visa Invitation Letter a few days ago. But the letter doesn't > contain attachment. What should I do? > > > > > Thanks > Zhi Chang > > > > __ >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] purplerbot irc bot for logs and transclusion

On 03/16/2016 10:45 AM, Paul Belanger wrote: > I would like to see it added to openstack-infra so we can properly > manage it. I agree with Paul here. To that end I have added an item on next week's infra meeting agenda about IRC Bots with the aim of discussing this, as this is not the only bot

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] Proposing Tony Breeds for stable-maint-core

On 03/18/2016 04:11 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > I'd like to propose tonyb for stable-maint-core. Tony is pretty much my > day to day guy on stable, he's generally in every stable team meeting > (which is not attended well so I appreciate it), and he's as proactive > as ever on staying on top of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra] revert new gerrit

On 03/18/2016 01:16 PM, Boris Pavlovic wrote: > Hi everybody, > > What about if we just create new project for alternative Gerrit WebUI and > use it? > I don't think that with current set of web frameworks it would be too hard. > > Best regards, > Boris Pavlovic It's called vinz:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra] revert new gerrit

On 03/18/2016 06:03 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 20:58 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> Yes, we had a session on it several summits ago, a group of >> contributors said they were going to work on developing it, pushed >> up a skeleton repo, and then we never heard back from

Re: [openstack-dev] [Third-Party][CI] Modify CI accouts in CI group

ensure you understood the function, and you do. > > And also thank you for telling me about the gerrit usage. You're welcome. Thanks, Anita. > > Best regards, > Watanabe.isao > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Anita Kuno [mailto:ante...@anteaya.info] >>

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

On 03/15/2016 04:25 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 03/15/2016 08:22 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: >> However, at the risk of sounding like a humorless automaton, we have a valid >> candidate. >> * Monty Taylor for Packaging-Deb PTL >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/292690/ > > This started as a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Third-Party][CI] Modify CI accouts in CI group

your accounts in the gerrit group. Thank you, Anita. > > Best regards, > Watanabe.isao > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Anita Kuno [mailto:ante...@anteaya.info] >> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 11:57 PM >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.o

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Announcing my candidacy for PTL

On 03/14/2016 03:32 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 3/14/2016 1:57 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 03/14/2016 02:46 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >>> Hi everyone, this is my announcement to run for Nova PTL in the Newton >>> cycle. >>> >>> First

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Announcing my candidacy for PTL

On 03/14/2016 02:46 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > Hi everyone, this is my announcement to run for Nova PTL in the Newton > cycle. > > First off, I see the Nova PTL role as a service position to the rest of > the team. The job of the PTL is to organize the release schedule, help > people coordinate

Re: [openstack-dev] [Third-Party][CI] Modify CI accouts in CI group

On 03/14/2016 04:39 AM, Watanabe, Isao wrote: > Hello, Third-Party Coordinators > Cc：Ramy > > Could you please help me about the following CI accounts changes in CI group? > > [1]Add account > Name: Fujitsu ISM CI > Mail: fj-lsoft-is...@dl.jp.fujitsu.com You need to create this account before

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA] Not running for PTL

On 03/11/2016 02:34 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm writing this to announce that I am not running for QA PTL this cycle. I've > been the QA PTL for the past 4 cycles and I think it's time for another person > to take over the role. I think during the past 4 cycles the QA

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Nova PTL for Newton

On 03/11/2016 02:22 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > Hi, > > It has been greatly rewarding serving you all as Nova PTL over the > Liberty and Mitaka cycles. I thank you all for the support, > encouragement and advice I have been given over the last year. I > really appreciate that. (That's british speak

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] PTL noncandidacy

On 03/11/2016 12:19 PM, David Lyle wrote: > After five cycles as PTL of Horizon, I've decided not to run for the > Newton cycle. > > I am exceptionally proud of the things we've accomplished over this > time. I'm amazed by how much our project's community has grown and > evolved. > > Looking at

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 th

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] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 04:30 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 03/01/2016 09:03 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >>>>>> In Vancouver I happened to be sitting behind someone who stated "I'm >>>>>> just here for the buzz.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 03/01/2016 05:08 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main >>> summit to people who are present to other events (like this new >>> separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would >>> allow for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [devstack] [neutron] How to ask for linuxbridge instead of openvswitch

On 02/29/2016 05:58 PM, Mike Spreitzer wrote: > How would I modify the recipe at > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/devstack/guides/neutron.html#using-neutron-with-a-single-interface > > to get linuxbridge instead of openvswitch? > > Thanks, > Mike > > > > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 06:17 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > > > Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main > summit to people who are present to other events (like this new > separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would > allow for a wider

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 05:34 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 15:57 -0500, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 02/29/2016 03:10 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: >>> >>>>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access >>>>> the main summit

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/29/2016 03:10 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > >>> Current thinking would be to give preferential rates to access the main >>> summit to people who are present to other events (like this new >>> separated contributors-oriented event, or Ops midcycle(s)). That would >>> allow for a wider definition

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 10:49 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > Yes, please. Your proposal addresses the big issue I have with current > summits which is the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 12:35 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Clayton O'Neill wrote: >> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >> or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? >> >> Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the >> thought

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/23/2016 04:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Tim Bell wrote: >> On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >>> [...] >>> I am sure there are more questions that will pop up. Like I assume >>> this means there is no ATC free pass to the summit? And I guess a >>> small

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 06:49 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >> >>> On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: On 02/22/2016

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:06 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > I agree with Daniel + a couple more comments inline. > > On 02/22/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Mitaka Mid-Cycle Coding Sprint Registration

On 02/15/2016 04:06 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > Hi folks! > > The mid-cycle is almost upon us. IBM, as the sponsor company, is > requesting some information from everyone is registered (name, email, > company, US citizen or not), so please make sure to register on the > Eventbrite site I've created

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

On 02/08/2016 11:11 AM, Fausto Marzi wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> On 02/08/2016 10:29 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> On 02/08/2016 10:07 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Brian Curtin wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Jay

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

On 02/07/2016 10:42 PM, Michael Still wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > [snip] > > >> Fifth - if we do this, the real need for the mid-cycles we currently have >> probably goes away since the summit week can be a legit wall-to-wall work >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

On 02/08/2016 04:09 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Jay Pipes wrote: >> tl;dr >> = >> >> I have long thought that the OpenStack Summits have become too >> commercial and provide little value to the software engineers >> contributing to OpenStack. >> >> I propose the following: >> >> 1) Separate

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

On 02/08/2016 09:42 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 02/08/2016 04:09 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Jay Pipes wrote: >>> tl;dr >>> = >>> >>> I have long thought that the OpenStack Summits have become too >>> commercial and provide little value t

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

On 02/05/2016 02:41 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Dean Troyer's message of 2016-02-05 12:27:44 -0600: >> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann >> wrote: >> >>> So, is Poppy "open core"? >>> >> >> It doesn't follow the 'spirit' of open core, but it does

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

On 02/05/2016 12:14 PM, Ryan Brown wrote: > On 02/05/2016 05:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> Even before OpenStack had a name, our "Four Opens" principles were >> created to define how we would operate as a community. The first open, >> "Open Source", added the following

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Third Party CI Deadlines for Mitaka and N

On 02/03/2016 05:51 PM, Mike Perez wrote: > On 17:00 Nov 30, Mike Perez wrote: >> On October 28th 2015 at the Ironic Third Party CI summit session [1], there >> was >> consensus by the Ironic core and participating vendors that the set of >> deadlines will be: >> >> * Mitaka-2ː Driver teams will

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] changes to keystone-core!

On 01/28/2016 02:34 AM, Chen, Wei D wrote: > Hi, > > > > Many thanks to everyone for your patient guidance and mentoring me in the > past years! It's your help to make me grow up from a > newbie! > > > > As a core project in OpenStack, keystone has grown to be several > sub-projects,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] PCI CI is down

On 01/20/2016 10:14 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: > On 01/20/2016 03:03 PM, Lenny Verkhovsky wrote: >> Nikola, >> I guess Mellanox CI ( running, failing , non-voting ) can assist on this >> issue. >> Since we found it and opened a bug. >> > > Ah - I was not aware that they use the same

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] sponsor some LVM development

On 01/18/2016 02:49 PM, Premysl Kouril wrote: > Hello everybody, > > we are a Europe based operator and we have a case for LVM based nova > instances in our new cloud infrastructure. We are currently > considering to contribute to OpenStack Nova to implement some features > which are currently

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Nova midcycle list of attendees

On 01/14/2016 12:38 PM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote: > I have created a list of attendees for the Nova midcycle here: > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints/NovaMitakaSprintAttendees > > Obviously I can't put anyone's name on it for privacy reasons. What privacy reasons? Every other

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] [Manila] NetApp CI will be offline next week

On 01/13/2016 10:43 AM, Kerr, Andrew wrote: > Hi all, > > The physical equipment that runs the NetApp CI system is scheduled to be > moved to a new building next week. In order to accommodate this move we will > be taking the NetApp CI system offline at EOB on Friday Jan 15 and plan to > have

Re: [openstack-dev] Spam of patches

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/12/2016 09:32 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12 2016, Amrith Kumar wrote: > >> My question to the ML is this, should stylistic changes of this >> kind be handled in a consistent way across all projects, maybe >> with a hacking rule and

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] Puppet OpenStack Mid-Cycle (Mitaka)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/05/2016 11:49 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > > > On 12/24/2015 09:18 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> Regarding the list of attendees and their schedule constraints, >> it seems that: 25-26-27 of January would work for everyone. > > Just for the

Re: [openstack-dev] [ThirdParty][CI] [patch] Status page at http://ci-watch.tintri.com/project

On 12/21/2015 09:20 AM, Philipp Marek wrote: > Hi all, > > I quite like the page at http://ci-watch.tintri.com/project - it gives > a very quick overview about the failures one should look into, and which to > ignore ;) > > > Please let me state before anything else that I don't know any of

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] Stable team PTL nominations are open

On 12/09/2015 09:02 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2015-12-09 09:57:24 +0100: >> Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Thierry Carrez wrote: The nomination deadline is passed, we have two candidates! I'll be setting up the election shortly (with Jeremy's

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Evolving the stadium concept

On 12/09/2015 07:06 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 12/09/2015 01:46 AM, Armando M. wrote: >> >> >> On 3 December 2015 at 02:21, Thierry Carrez > > wrote: >> >> Armando M. wrote: >> > On 2 December 2015 at 01:16, Thierry Carrez

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] IRC broken

On 12/09/2015 07:33 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: > It seems IRC is broken for the meeting we're supposed to be having right > now. The symptom is that you can logon but may only see a fragment of the > users/messages that are being sent. We even had a partitioning where 2 > people could exchange

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] [infra] IRC broken

e has any other pertinent details, please include them. > > Tim > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM Anita Kuno <ante...@anteaya.info> wrote: > >> On 12/09/2015 07:33 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: >>> It seems IRC is broken for the meeting we're supposed to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [release] New Mitaka release schedule page

On 12/08/2015 04:41 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Anita Kuno wrote: >> I often use the release schedule to reference the upcoming summit, so >> Austin in this case. Any thoughts on when we can expect an n.rst file in >> /releases? Any objection to me offering one up if only to

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][docs] Third Party Neutron Drivers

On 12/07/2015 10:17 AM, Sean M. Collins wrote: > Thanks for the advance notice. Sounds good to me. > I announced this at Monday's third party meeting. Thanks Lana, Anita. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][docs][api] Propose Virtual Nova API Doc Sprint on Dec 8 and 9

On 12/07/2015 09:45 AM, Alex Xu wrote: > Anita, thanks for the reminder, so cool we have such wiki, just add my one. Thank you Alex, I hope you have a good sprint. Anita. > > 2015-12-07 21:49 GMT+08:00 Anita Kuno <ante...@anteaya.info>: > >> On 12/04/2015 09:48 AM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][docs][api] Propose Virtual Nova API Doc Sprint on Dec 8 and 9

On 12/04/2015 09:48 AM, Alex Xu wrote: > Just reminder the event which close the time, the virtual doc sprint is > right next week. Welcome to join us! Please include the details of your virtual sprint on the virtual sprints wikipage: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/VirtualSprints Thank you,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [release] New Mitaka release schedule page

On 12/04/2015 05:50 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As part of the effort to move reference information off the wiki to a > more peer-reviewable area, the Mitaka release schedule page was moved to: > > http://docs.openstack.org/releases/schedules/mitaka.html > > One side benefit is

Re: [openstack-dev] Nominations open for the N and O names of OpenStack

On 11/09/2015 08:27 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > Hey everybody! > > It's release naming time, and this time we get to do two at once! > > If you'd like to propose a name, there are two wiki pages: > > For the N release, where the geographic region is "Texas Hill Country": > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Announcing Third Party CI for Proliant iLO Drivers

On 12/02/2015 11:56 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:48:44PM -0500, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 11/30/2015 12:33 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> I was there and I already said that I'm not buying into "spamming the >>> list" argument. There

Re: [openstack-dev] Learning to Debug the Gate

On 11/23/2015 02:19 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 11/18/2015 06:03 PM, Mikhail Medvedev wrote: >> We had a mini tutorial today in #openstack-infra, were Clark Boylan >> explained how one can bring up an environment to debug logstash-2.0. >> This is tangential to "debugging

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Do we need to have a mid-cycle?

On 11/23/2015 01:00 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 06:05:54AM -0800, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: >> >> Another idea I floated last week was to do a virtual midcycle of sorts. >> Treat it like a normal midcycle in that everyone tells their management >> "I'm out for 3-4 days for

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Announcing Third Party CI for Proliant iLO Drivers

On 11/30/2015 11:25 AM, Gururaj Grandhi wrote: > Hi, > > > > This is to announce that we have setup a Third Party CI environment > for Proliant iLO Drivers. The results will be posted under "HP Proliant CI > check" section in Non-voting mode. We will be running the basic deploy >

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Announcing Third Party CI for Proliant iLO Drivers

On 11/30/2015 12:17 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 11/30/2015 05:34 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 11/30/2015 11:25 AM, Gururaj Grandhi wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> This is to announce that we have setup a Third Party CI >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

On 11/29/2015 02:02 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> I notice nova have a clarification of project scope: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Announcing Third Party CI for Proliant iLO Drivers

On 11/30/2015 12:33 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 11/30/2015 06:24 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 11/30/2015 12:17 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> On 11/30/2015 05:34 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >>>> On 11/30/2015 11:25 AM, Gururaj Grandhi wrote: >>>>> Hi, >&

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Third Party CI Deadlines for Mitaka and N

On 11/30/2015 08:00 PM, Mike Perez wrote: > On October 28th 2015 at the Ironic Third Party CI summit session [1], there > was > consensus by the Ironic core and participating vendors that the set of > deadlines will be: > > * Mitaka-2ː Driver teams will have registered their intent to run CI by

Re: [openstack-dev] Learning to Debug the Gate

On 11/18/2015 06:03 PM, Mikhail Medvedev wrote: > We had a mini tutorial today in #openstack-infra, were Clark Boylan > explained how one can bring up an environment to debug logstash-2.0. > This is tangential to "debugging the gate", but still could be useful to > better understand logstash/es

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] [Infra] Gerrit downtime on November 18 2015

Sorry this got posted to the infra mailing list and missed the dev mailing list. Anita. On 11/17/2015 08:04 PM, Spencer Krum wrote: > Hello, > > The infra team will not be upgrading gerrit tomorrow, as a result the > planned outage will not occur. We do not have a date yet that we will be >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >