Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception for Role Decomposition patch

[Dmitry Klenov]

Thanks, Vladimir!

-Dmitry.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov <
vkozhuka...@mirantis.com> wrote:

> Thanks for you efforts, FFE is granted, please go ahead. I hope we'll get
> it merged by 09/09/2016.
>
> Vladimir Kozhukalov
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Dmitry Klenov <dkle...@mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Fuelers,
>>
>> I would like to ask for a FFE for "Role Decomposition" feature. The spec
>> is merged and can be fould at [0]. We were unable to land the patch [1] to
>> Newton in time. So I would like to ask for extension till 09.09.2016 to
>> land this patch.
>>
>> Changes made in the patch would introduce concept of the tags, which
>> would bring additional flexibility into nailgun role system. They are
>> compatible with previous role schema so should not introduce regression.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dmitry.
>> ---
>> [0] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/346248/
>> [1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/341678/
>>
>> 
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
>> e
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception for Role Decomposition patch

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Fuelers,

I would like to ask for a FFE for "Role Decomposition" feature. The spec is
merged and can be fould at [0]. We were unable to land the patch [1] to
Newton in time. So I would like to ask for extension till 09.09.2016 to
land this patch.

Changes made in the patch would introduce concept of the tags, which would
bring additional flexibility into nailgun role system. They are compatible
with previous role schema so should not introduce regression.

Thanks,
Dmitry.
---
[0] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/346248/
[1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/341678/
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Artur Svechnikov to the fuel-web-core team

[Dmitry Klenov]

Congratulations, Arthur! Well done!


On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Aleksey Kasatkin <akasat...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Well, the agreement is reached. I've added Artur to fuel-web-core group.
>
> Let's continue discussion on time management questions if it will become an 
> issue.
>
> Artur, congratulations!
>
>
> Aleksey Kasatkin
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Evgeniy L <e...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> It depends, but usually it takes half of working time to do reviews, I'm
>> not sure if we can assume 25-30%, also finding a good reviewer usually is
>> much harder than a person who can write the code, so it would be much more
>> productive to encourage people to spend as much time as they can on making
>> the project better and helping other contributors, than restricting them to
>> review code for not more than 2.5 hours.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Dmitry Klenov <dkle...@mirantis.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> From technical standpoint I fully support Arthur to become core
>>> reviewer. I like thorough reviews that he is making.
>>>
>>> Although I have some concerns as well. Planned tasks for our team will
>>> not allow Arthur to spend more than 25-30% of his time for reviewing. If
>>> that is fine - my concerns are resolved.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dmitry.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Sergey Vasilenko <
>>> svasile...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /sv
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Artur Svechnikov to the fuel-web-core team

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Folks,

>From technical standpoint I fully support Arthur to become core reviewer. I
like thorough reviews that he is making.

Although I have some concerns as well. Planned tasks for our team will not
allow Arthur to spend more than 25-30% of his time for reviewing. If that
is fine - my concerns are resolved.

Thanks,
Dmitry.

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Sergey Vasilenko 
wrote:

> +1
>
>
> /sv
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for HugePages

[Dmitry Klenov]

Folks,

Majority of the commits for HugePages feature are merged in time [0].

One commit for validation is still to be merged [1]. So we would ask for 2
more days to complete the feature.

Regards,
Dmitry.

[0]
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+AND+topic:bp/support-hugepages
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286495/

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodae...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Granted, merge deadline March 16, feature to be marked experimental
> until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable.
>
> --
> Dmitry Borodaenko
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:23:06PM +0300, Dmitry Klenov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Support for Huge
> > pages for improved performance" feature [0].
> >
> > Part of this feature is already merged [1]. We have the following patches
> > in work / on review:
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286628/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/282367/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286495/
> >
> > And we need to write new patches for the following parts of this feature:
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-hugepages
> >
> > We need 1.5 weeks after FF to finish this feature.
> > Risk of not delivering it after 1.5 weeks is low.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dmitry
> >
> > [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-hugepages
> > [1]
> >
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+topic:bp/support-hugepages
>
> >
> __
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for Numa and CPU pinning

[Dmitry Klenov]

Folks,

Majority of the commits for Numa and CPU pinning feature are merged in time
[0].

One commit for validation is still to be merged [1]. So we would need 2
more days to complete the feature.

Regards,
Dmitry.

[0]
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+AND+topic:bp/support-numa-cpu-pinning
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285282/

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodae...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Granted, merge deadline March 16, feature to be marked experimental
> until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable.
>
> --
> Dmitry Borodaenko
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:23:08PM +0300, Dmitry Klenov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Add support for
> > NUMA/CPU pinning features" feature [0].
> >
> > Part of this feature is already merged [1]. We have the following patches
> > in work / on review:
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/281802/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285282/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284171/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280624/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280115/
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285309/
> >
> > No new patches are expected.
> >
> > We need 2 weeks after FF to finish this feature.
> > Risk of not delivering it after 2 weeks is low.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dmitry
> >
> > [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-numa-cpu-pinning
> > [1]
> >
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+topic:bp/support-numa-cpu-pinning
>
> >
> __
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

[Dmitry Klenov]

Maksim, good job! +1 from my side though I am not a core.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev <
azvyagint...@mirantis.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Aleksandr Didenko 
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Kyrylo Galanov 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Roman Vyalov 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1

 On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Sergey Kulanov 
 wrote:

> Hey Fuelers,
>
> Since we've successfully moved [1] virtual-box scripts from fuel-main
> [2] to
> separate fuel-virtualbox [3] git repo, I propose to update
> fuel-virtualbox-core
> team [4] by adding Maksim Malchuk. Maksim is the main contributor to
> these
> scripts during Mitaka release cycle [5]
>
> Fuel Cores, please vote.
>
> [1].
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086560.html
> [2]. https://github.com/openstack/fuel-main
> [3]. https://github.com/openstack/fuel-virtualbox
> [4]. https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/1299,members
> [5]. https://github.com/openstack/fuel-virtualbox/commits/master
>
> --
> Sergey
> DevOps Engineer
> IRC: SergK
> Skype: Sergey_kul
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


 __
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe:
 openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Best regards,
>Aleksey Zvyagintsev
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for Numa and CPU pinning

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi,

I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Add support for
NUMA/CPU pinning features" feature [0].

Part of this feature is already merged [1]. We have the following patches
in work / on review:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/281802/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285282/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284171/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280624/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280115/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285309/

No new patches are expected.

We need 2 weeks after FF to finish this feature.
Risk of not delivering it after 2 weeks is low.

Regards,
Dmitry

[0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-numa-cpu-pinning
[1]
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+topic:bp/support-numa-cpu-pinning
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for HugePages

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi,

I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Support for Huge
pages for improved performance" feature [0].

Part of this feature is already merged [1]. We have the following patches
in work / on review:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286628/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/282367/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286495/

And we need to write new patches for the following parts of this feature:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-hugepages

We need 1.5 weeks after FF to finish this feature.
Risk of not delivering it after 1.5 weeks is low.

Regards,
Dmitry

[0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/support-hugepages
[1]
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+topic:bp/support-hugepages
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Fedor Zhadaev for the fuel-menu-core team

[Dmitry Klenov]

Well done, Fedor! Congrats!

-Dmitry.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Maksim Malchuk 
wrote:

> Congrats!
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Fedor Zhadaev 
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you!
>> --
>> Kind Regards,
>> Fedor Zhadaev
>>
>> skype: zhadaevfm
>> IRC: fzhadaev
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Maksim Malchuk,
> Senior DevOps Engineer,
> MOS: Product Engineering,
> Mirantis, Inc
> 
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] CentOS bootstrap image retirement

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Sergey,

I fully support this idea. It was our plan as well when we were developing
Ubuntu Bootstrap feature. So let's proceed with CentOS bootstrap removal.

BR,
Dmitry.

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Sergey Kulanov 
wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> I think it's time to declare CentOS bootstrap image retirement.
> Since Fuel 8.0 we've switched to Ubuntu bootstrap image usage [1, 2] and
> CentOS one became deprecated,
> so in Fuel 9.0 we can freely remove it [2].
> For now we are building CentOS bootstrap image together with ISO and then
> package it into rpm [3], so by removing fuel-bootstrap-image [3] we:
>
> * simplify patching/update story, since we don't need to rebuild/deliver
> this
>   package on changes in dependent packages [4].
>
> * speed-up ISO build process, since building centos bootstrap image takes
> ~ 20%
>   of build-iso time.
>
> We've prepared related blueprint for this change [5] and spec [6]. We also
> have some draft patchsets [7]
> which passed BVT tests.
>
> So the next steps are:
> * get feedback by reviewing the spec/patches;
> * remove related code from the rest fuel projects (fuel-menu, fuel-devops,
> fuel-qa).
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
> [1]
> https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/fuel-specs/specs/7.0/fuel-bootstrap-on-ubuntu.html
> [2]
> https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/fuel-specs/specs/8.0/dynamically-build-bootstrap.html
> [3]
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-main/blob/master/packages/rpm/specs/fuel-bootstrap-image.spec
> [4]
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-main/blob/master/bootstrap/module.mk#L12-L50
> [5]
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/remove-centos-bootstrap-from-fuel
> [6] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273159/
> [7]
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/remove-centos-bootstrap-from-fuel
>
>
> --
> Sergey
> DevOps Engineer
> IRC: SergK
> Skype: Sergey_kul
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi folks,

I would propose to keep current versioning schema until fuel release
schedule is fully aligned with OpenStack releases. AFAIK it is expected to
happen since 9.0. After it we can switch to OpenStack version names.

BR,
Dmitry.

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I want to bring this up again. There were no progress since last
> Oleg's mail, and we must decide. It's good that we still have
> "2015.1.0-8.0" version while OpenStack uses "Liberty" name for
> versions.
>
> Let's decide which name to use, file a bug and finally resolve it.
>
> - Igor
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > Igor, it is interesting that you mention backward compatibility in this
> > context.
> >
> > I can see lots of code in Nailgun that checks for release version to
> > enable/disable features that were added or removed more than 2 releases
> > before [1] [2] [3] (there's a lot more).
> >
> > What should we do about that code? I believe we could 'safely' delete
> it. It
> > will make our code base much more compact and supportable without even
> > decoupling serializers, etc. Is my assumption correct, or I just missing
> > something?
> >
> > This will also help to switch to another scheme of versioning of
> releases,
> > since there will be much less places where those version scheme is
> > hardcoded.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/release.py#L142-L145
> > [2]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L554-L555
> > [3]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/serializers/node.py#L124-L126
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Igor Kalnitsky  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Oleg,
> >>
> >> I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
> >> only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
> >> there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> wrote:
> >> > In short, because of this:
> >> >
> >> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
> >> >
> >> > Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
> >> > first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a
> >> > cluster
> >> > with given release.
> >> >
> >> > -Oleg
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
> >> >  wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
> >> >>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist
> in
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> code and allows for smooth transition.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Best regards,
> >> >>> Oleg Gelbukh
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> 
> >>  Oleg,
> >> 
> >>  Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
> >> 
> >>  - Igor
> >> 
> >>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
> >>  wrote:
> >>  > Igor,
> >>  >
> >>  > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases
> are
> >>  > dropped.
> >>  > [1] [2]
> >>  >
> >>  > [1]
> >>  >
> >>  >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
> >>  > [2]
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
> >>  >
> >>  > --
> >>  > Best regards,
> >>  > Oleg Gelbukh
> >>  >
> >>  > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
> >>  > 
> >>  > wrote:
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Oleg,
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they
> >>  >> planning
> >>  >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
> >>  >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of
> >>  >> something
> >>  >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to
> >>  >> drop
> >>  >> it?
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Thanks,
> >>  >> Igor
> >>  >>
> >>  >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> wrote:
> >>  >> > Igor,
> >>  >> >
> >>  >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
> >>  >> > OpenStack. So
> >>  >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
> >>  >> > Libery,
> >>  >> > 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Moved blueprints out of 8.0

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Mike,

Yes, I agree that we cannot move blueprints to "Implemented" unless all
dependencies are complete (incl tests and doc). Probably we can use "Beta
available" for such tickets instead of "Deployment" as we can already try
the functionality.

All development-related child blueprints for [1] were properly updated and
moved to "Implemented" state.

[1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/dynamically-build-bootstrap

Thanks,
Dmitry.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Mike Scherbakov 
wrote:

> Hi all,
> I've moved the following blueprints:
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-moved-bps-from-8.0
>
> I called for blueprints status update at [1], [2], [3], [4], and suggested
> to move those which are not "Implemented". Now I finally did, except
> test/doc related (which can be done after FF).
>
> I think I moved a few which already implemented, as far as I'm aware of.
> For instance:
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/master-on-centos7
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/dynamically-build-bootstrap
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/package-for-js-modules
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/component-registry
>
> If those are in fact done, please move them back, and set proper status.
> There is uncertainty to what to do with those parent blueprints, like
> ubuntu bootstrap one, which have incomplete test- and docs- related. My
> suggestion would be to set status "Deployment" and move them back to 8.0,
> if all coding is done. Once dependent test/docs are done, parent blueprint
> should be updated and become "Implemented".
>
> Thank you,
>
> [1]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/081047.html
> [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-8.0-FF-meeting, line 428
> [3]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/081131.html
> [4]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/fuel/2015/fuel.2015-12-10-16.00.log.html,
> 16:32
>
> --
> Mike Scherbakov
> #mihgen
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Ubuntu bootstrap] Ubuntu bootstrap becomes default in the Fuel

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hello folks,

I would like to announce that we have completed all items for 'Ubuntu
bootstrap' feature. Thanks to the team for hard work and dedication!

Starting from today Ubuntu bootstrap is enabled in the Fuel by default.

Also it is worth mentioning that Ubuntu bootstrap is integrated with
'Biosdevnames' feature implemented by MOS-Linux team, so new bootstrap will
also benefit from persistent interface naming.

Thanks,
Dmitry.
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE for Ubuntu bootstrap

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Folks,

I would like to ask for FFE extension by 1 day. Reason: we didn't have
green BVT today due to BUD network connectivity issue.

Commits to merge:

   - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250662/ - Switch itself.
   - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251908/ - QA suite compatibility.
   - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/254716/ - CentOS7 compatibility
   commit.

Thanks,

Dmitry.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovat...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> +1 for FFE toll Tuesday 8th of December.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergii Golovatiuk,
> Skype #golserge
> IRC #holser
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Dmitry Klenov <dkle...@mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike and Igor,
>>
>> Thank you for the opinions.
>>
>> We already talked to Matt and he is fine with Fuel Menu commit. We will
>> target the changes for Tuesday and will work with reviewers and Mos-Linux
>> team to have blocker bug resolved and commits merged.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dmitry.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Dmitry,
>>>
>>> I'm ok with FFE till Tuesday. Moreover, it makes sense to do so in
>>> order to reduce affection on CentOS 7 patches.
>>>
>>> - Igor
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Dmitry Klenov <dkle...@mirantis.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi folks,
>>> >
>>> > Let me clarify the situation with Ubuntu bootstrap feature.
>>> >
>>> > First of all, I would like to highlight that all functional commits
>>> for this
>>> > feature were merged. This means that starting from yesterday everyone
>>> has an
>>> > ability to switch to Ubuntu-based bootstrap manually and start using
>>> it. So
>>> > I do not see the risk in loosing testing cycles in the community.
>>> >
>>> > The item which brought concerns on today status meeting was the
>>> enablement
>>> > of the feature by default. To do it, 2 patches have to be merged
>>> together:
>>> > * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250662/ - main switch.
>>> > * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251908/ - compatibility commit to
>>> QA
>>> > suite to comply with new bootstrap config format.
>>> >
>>> > I would like to raise the question if we can have a feature freeze
>>> exception
>>> > for these 2 patches?
>>> >
>>> > There are a couple of reasons why I consider it safer to merge these
>>> patches
>>> > several days later:
>>> > * There is a bug caught today which will block the tests to pass if we
>>> > switch to Ubuntu bootstrap by default:
>>> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1522406
>>> > * There were concerns that a lot of FF commit merges can bring
>>> instability
>>> > to QA suite. So it might be reasonable not to bring one more variable
>>> right
>>> > now and to enable ubuntu bootstrap by default when all automated tests
>>> are
>>> > stabilized.
>>> >
>>> > I would like to ask engineering and QA leads to express their ideas on
>>> this.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Dmitry.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> __
>>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> > Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE for Ubuntu bootstrap

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi Mike and Igor,

Thank you for the opinions.

We already talked to Matt and he is fine with Fuel Menu commit. We will
target the changes for Tuesday and will work with reviewers and Mos-Linux
team to have blocker bug resolved and commits merged.

Thanks,
Dmitry.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Hey Dmitry,
>
> I'm ok with FFE till Tuesday. Moreover, it makes sense to do so in
> order to reduce affection on CentOS 7 patches.
>
> - Igor
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Dmitry Klenov <dkle...@mirantis.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Let me clarify the situation with Ubuntu bootstrap feature.
> >
> > First of all, I would like to highlight that all functional commits for
> this
> > feature were merged. This means that starting from yesterday everyone
> has an
> > ability to switch to Ubuntu-based bootstrap manually and start using it.
> So
> > I do not see the risk in loosing testing cycles in the community.
> >
> > The item which brought concerns on today status meeting was the
> enablement
> > of the feature by default. To do it, 2 patches have to be merged
> together:
> > * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250662/ - main switch.
> > * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251908/ - compatibility commit to QA
> > suite to comply with new bootstrap config format.
> >
> > I would like to raise the question if we can have a feature freeze
> exception
> > for these 2 patches?
> >
> > There are a couple of reasons why I consider it safer to merge these
> patches
> > several days later:
> > * There is a bug caught today which will block the tests to pass if we
> > switch to Ubuntu bootstrap by default:
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1522406
> > * There were concerns that a lot of FF commit merges can bring
> instability
> > to QA suite. So it might be reasonable not to bring one more variable
> right
> > now and to enable ubuntu bootstrap by default when all automated tests
> are
> > stabilized.
> >
> > I would like to ask engineering and QA leads to express their ideas on
> this.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dmitry.
> >
> >
> __
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE for Ubuntu bootstrap

[Dmitry Klenov]

Hi folks,

Let me clarify the situation with Ubuntu bootstrap feature.

First of all, I would like to highlight that all functional commits for
this feature were merged. This means that starting from yesterday everyone
has an ability to switch to Ubuntu-based bootstrap manually and start using
it. So I do not see the risk in loosing testing cycles in the community.

The item which brought concerns on today status meeting was the enablement
of the feature by default. To do it, 2 patches have to be merged together:
* https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250662/ - main switch.
* https://review.openstack.org/#/c/251908/ - compatibility commit to QA
suite to comply with new bootstrap config format.

I would like to raise the question if we can have a feature freeze
exception for these 2 patches?

There are a couple of reasons why I consider it safer to merge these
patches several days later:
* There is a bug caught today which will block the tests to pass if we
switch to Ubuntu bootstrap by default:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1522406
* There were concerns that a lot of FF commit merges can bring instability
to QA suite. So it might be reasonable not to bring one more variable right
now and to enable ubuntu bootstrap by default when all automated tests are
stabilized.

I would like to ask engineering and QA leads to express their ideas on this.

Thanks,
Dmitry.
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev