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

On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez mailto:thie...@openstack.org>> wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. This proposal sounds fantastic. Thank you very much to those that help put it t

[openstack-dev] Introducing simple client creation in os-client-config

Hey all, I just responded to a mailing list thread about a question related to constructing a nova Client object - and I realized I'd been remiss about sending out an announcement of a couple of little but helpful features we landed in os-client-config - namely, simple factory functions to cr

Re: [openstack-dev] [gate] ansible release breaks devstack-gate

On 02/25/2016 05:49 AM, Sean Dague wrote: It looks like a new ansible release overnight breaks devstack-gate (something we assumed was a success, empty subnode commands, is now a failure when going from 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.1.0), which is why there is a massive failure across the board. The code to in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] audience for release notes

On 02/26/2016 10:41 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2016-02-26 11:43:09 -0400: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 09:03:49AM -0600, Brant Knudson wrote: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: I'v

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara]FFE Request for nfs-as-a-data-source

On 03/01/2016 07:23 PM, Chen, Weiting wrote: Hi all, I would like to request a FFE for the feature “nfs-as-a-data-source”: BP: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sahara/+spec/nfs-as-a-data-source BP Review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/210839/ Please forgive me for not having been involved

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - Changing the Neutron default security group rules

On 03/02/2016 01:04 PM, Xav Paice wrote: On 3 March 2016 at 07:52, Sean Dague mailto:s...@dague.net>> wrote: On 03/02/2016 01:46 PM, Armando M. wrote: > IMO, I think that's a loophole that should be closed. We should all > strive to make OpenStack clouds behave alike. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - Changing the Neutron default security group rules

On 03/02/2016 01:53 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: On Wed, Mar 2, 2016, at 02:36 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: Clearly, some operators and users disagree with the opinion that 'by default security groups should closed off' given that we have several large public providers who have changed these defaults (d

Re: [openstack-dev] When to revert a patch?

On 03/04/2016 08:37 AM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hijacked from ' [openstack-dev] [ironic] Remember to follow RFE process' thread: > Should we revert the patch [1] for now? (Disclaimer. I haven't looked at the > patch itself. But I don't think I should have to, to know what the API

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] How do we move forward with xstatic releases?

On 03/07/2016 10:52 PM, Richard Jones wrote: We've solved *most* of the issues around releasing new xstatic packages, documented here[1] (and related documentation). We have one final issue that's blocking us, which is that during the xstatic release there will be a point at which Horizon may be

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

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Maintaining httplib2 python library

On 03/14/2016 09:51 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Sean Dague Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: March 14, 2016 at 09:41:02 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Maintaining httplib2 python li

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

On 03/18/2016 08:31 AM, Andrey Kurilin wrote: Hi all! I want to start this thread because I'm tired. I spent a lot of time, but I can't review as easy as it was with old interface. New Gerrit is awful. Here are several issues: * It is not possible to review patches at mobile phone. "New" "moder

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Packaging CI for Fuel

On 03/17/2016 03:11 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/16/2016 06:22 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: Are they any effort on OpenStack packaging? http://governance.openstack.org/reference/projects/packaging-deb.html http://governance.openstack.org/reference/projects/packaging-rpm.html I would like to se

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Streamline adoption of Magnum

On 03/22/2016 06:27 PM, Kevin Carter wrote: Comments in-line. On 03/22/2016 02:46 PM, Adrian Otto wrote: Team, This thread is a continuation of a branch of the previous High Availability thread [1]. As the Magnum PTL, I’ve been aware of a number of different groups who have started using Magnu

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Streamline adoption of Magnum

On 03/23/2016 04:45 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Monty Taylor Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: March 22, 2016 at 18:49:41 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Streamline adoption of

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

On 03/25/2016 03:52 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2016-03-25 16:33:44 -0400 (-0400), Jay Pipes wrote: [...] What I'm proposing isn't using or needing a custom OpenStack deployment. There's nothing non-standard at all about the PCI or NFV stuff besides the hardware required to functionally test it

[openstack-dev] [tc] Take back the naming process

I do not like how we are selecting names for our releases right now. The current process is autocratic and opaque and not fun - which is the exact opposite of what a community selected name should be. I propose: * As soon as development starts on release X, we open the voting for the name of rele

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Take back the naming process

On 01/27/2015 06:05 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > >> On Jan 27, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> >> I do not like how we are selecting names for our releases right now. >> The current process is autocratic and opaque and not fun - which is the >> exact oppo

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack Foundation] [tc] Take back the naming process

On 01/27/2015 10:35 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > Lauren Sell writes: > >> Hey Monty, >> >> I’d like to weigh in here, because I think there have been some >> misunderstandings around Lemming-gate. I’m glad you raised your >> concerns; it’s a good test of release naming for us all to discuss and >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Take back the naming process

ry careful with decisions, however well meaning, that take place outside of the public context. So please accept my apology for my language - and please engage with me in the discussion around how to make sure people don't inadvertently begin to feel disenfranchised. Thanks, Monty On 01/27/

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Take back the naming process

On 01/28/2015 01:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: >> You'll notice that I did say in my suggestion that ANYONE should be able >> to propose a name - I believe that would include non-dev people. Since >> the people in question are marketing people, I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] SQL Schema Downgrades and Related Issues

On 01/29/2015 11:06 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > As a quick preface, today there is the assumption you can upgrade and > downgrade your SQL Schema. For the most part we do our best to test all of > this in our unit tests (do upgrades and downgrades land us in the same > schema). What isn’t clear

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.db] PyMySQL review

On 01/28/2015 06:33 PM, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015, Mike Bayer wrote: >> I can envision turning this driver into a total monster, adding >> C-speedups where needed but without getting in the way of async >> patching, adding new APIs for explicit async, and everything else. >> H

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder][neutron][security] Rootwrap on root-intensive nodes

On 02/04/2015 06:57 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 11:58:03AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> The first one is performance -- each call would spawn a Python >> interpreter which would then call the system command. This was fine when >> there were just a few calls here and t

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] JavaScript docs?

On 02/04/2015 12:48 PM, Michael Krotscheck wrote: > I agree. StoryBoard's storyboard-webclient project has a lot of existing > code already that's pretty well documented, but without knowing what > documentation system we were going to settle on we never put any rule > enforcement in place. If some

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][Artifacts] Object Version format: SemVer vs pep440

On 02/10/2015 10:28 AM, Alexander Tivelkov wrote: > Hi folks, > > One of the key features that we are adding to Glance with the > introduction of Artifacts is the ability to have multiple versions of > the same object in the repository: this gives us the possibility to > query for the latest versi

Re: [openstack-dev] Removal of copyright statements above the Apache 2.0 license header

On 02/17/2015 07:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 01:16:46PM +0100, Christian Berendt wrote: >> On 02/17/2015 12:05 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> In section 4.(c) the LICENSE text says >>> >>> (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [all] python-glanceclient release 0.16.1

On 03/05/2015 12:02 AM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > The python-glanceclient release management team is pleased to announce: > python-glanceclient version 0.16.1 has been released on Thursday, Mar 5th > around 04:56 UTC. > > For more information, please find the details at: > > > https://lau

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] requirements-py{2, 3} and universal wheels

On 03/16/2015 08:32 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > On 17 March 2015 at 13:22, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-03-17 12:54:00 +1300: >>> I've raised this in reviews 157135 and 153966, but I think it deserves >>> a thread of its own. >>> >>> I think universal whee

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] requirements-py{2, 3} and universal wheels

On 03/17/2015 09:07 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 03/16/2015 08:32 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> On 17 March 2015 at 13:22, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2015-03-17 12:54:00 +1300: >>>> I've raised this in reviews 15

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] how to handle vendor-specific API microversions?

On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > Hi, > > I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I > noticed something that may be problematic. > > The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonically increasing > MAX_API_VERSION value in "nova/api/openstack/api_ve

Re: [openstack-dev] Cinder Third-Party CI: what next? (was Re: [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI))

On 03/24/2015 06:05 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Doug Hellmann > wrote: > >> Excerpts from Mark McClain's message of 2015-03-24 10:25:31 -0400: >>> >>> Echoing both Thierry and John. I support Mike’s decision to enforce the >> requirement. Maintaining drivers in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] What do people think of YAPF (like gofmt, for python)?

On 03/25/2015 05:50 PM, Maru Newby wrote: > I am excited by the release of YAPF [1], a gofmt-like too for python. > I think it has the potential to simplify style enforcement, and as > much as I appreciate our current hacking checks, I’d be much happier > not requiring developers to manually confor

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] What do people think of YAPF (like gofmt, for python)?

On 03/27/2015 07:21 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/26/2015 06:46 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> On 27 March 2015 at 09:14, Ryan Brown >> wrote: >> >>> Ooof, that's huge. If we can configure it to be less >>> aggressive I love the *idea* of having everything formatted >>> semantically, but that's a

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][tripleo] Optional Ansible deployment coming

On 03/31/2015 03:30 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Hey folks, > > One of our community members submitted a review to add optional Ansible > support to deploy OpenStack using Ansible and the containers within Kolla. > Our main objective remains: for third party deployment tools to use Kolla a

Re: [openstack-dev] The Evolution of core developer to maintainer?

On 04/01/2015 05:41 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Joe Gordon wrote: >> I am starting this thread based on Thierry's feedback on [0]. Instead >> of writing the same thing twice, you can look at the rendered html from >> that patch [1]. Neutron tried to go from core to maintainer but after >> input fr

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][oslo][clients] Let's speed up start of OpenStack libs and clients by optimizing imports with profimp

On 04/02/2015 06:22 PM, Brant Knudson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Boris Pavlovic wrote: > >> Hi stackers, >> >> Recently, I started working on speeding up Rally cli. >> >> What I understand immediately is that I don't understand why it takes >> 700-800ms >> to just run "rally versio

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra] Use of heat for CI of OpenStack

On 04/03/2015 08:55 AM, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote: > I was wondering.. > > Is the OpenStack CI/CD Infra using Heat in any way? Do the commits > trigger a new build of DevStack/OpenStack that is based on a Heat > Template or just the provisioning of a regular instance and then > deployment of code

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] SQLite support (migrations, work-arounds, and more), is it worth it?

On 04/03/2015 08:55 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > I am looking forward to the Liberty cycle and seeing the special > casing we do for SQLite in our migrations (and elsewhere). My > inclination is that we should (similar to the deprecation of > eventlet) deprecate support for SQLite in Keystone. In L

Re: [openstack-dev] What's Up Doc? Apr 10 2015

Sorry for top posting - I wasn't subscribed to the doc list before clarkb told me about this thread. Warning ... rage coming ... if you don't want to read rage on a Saturday, I recommend skipping this email. a) There may be a doc bug here, but I'm not 100% convinced it's a doc bug - I'll try to ch

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up Doc? Apr 10 2015

tack world than an official installation guide; no need to > expose newbies including myself to the complexity of v2. > > Bernd > > -----Original Message- > From: Monty Taylor [mailto:mord...@inaugust.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 6:22 AM > To: OpenStack Develop

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][pbr] splitting our deployment vs install dependencies

On 04/12/2015 06:43 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > Right now we do something that upstream pip considers wrong: we make > our requirements.txt be our install_requires. > > Upstream there are two separate concepts. > > install_requirements, which are meant to document what *must* be > installed to im

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][pbr] splitting our deployment vs install dependencies

On 04/12/2015 08:01 PM, James Polley wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 04/12/2015 06:43 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >>> Right now we do something that upstream pip considers wrong: we make >>> our requirements.txt be our install_re

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] QPID incompatible with python 3 and untested in gate -- what to do?

On 04/14/2015 01:22 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Hello! There's been some recent progress on python3 compatibility for > core libraries that OpenStack depends on[1], and this is likely to open > the flood gates for even more python3 problems to be found and fixed. > > Recently a proposal was made to m

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] QPID incompatible with python 3 and untested in gate -- what to do?

On 04/14/2015 08:21 PM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Sean Dague wrote: > >> It's time to be honest about the level of support that comes with those >> other backends, deprecate the plugability, and move on to more >> interesting problems. We do have plenty of them to solve. :) Perhaps

Re: [openstack-dev] [wsme] [ironic] [ceilometer] [magnum] [kite] [tuskar] WSME unmaintained ?

On 04/16/2015 07:41 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > Hi, > > We have a couple of Openstack projects that uses WSME for their REST > APIs[1], but WSME project looks abandoned. The review stats are not good, > for the last 40 days the project didn't have a single review from a core > reviewer[2], th

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in DevStack [was: Status of the nova-network to Neutron migration work]

On 04/17/2015 06:48 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: > I know the DevStack issue seems to be solved, but I had to > respond.inline > > From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin@pnnl.gov] Sent: Friday, April > 17, 2015 12:28 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > questions) Subject: Re: [

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in DevStack [was: Status of the nova-network to Neutron migration work]

On 04/18/2015 10:44 AM, Fox, Kevin M wrote: > Replying inline. > >> -Original Message- From: Monty Taylor >> [mailto:mord...@inaugust.com] Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 7:53 PM >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] >> [Nov

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Question for the TC candidates

On 04/24/2015 06:28 PM, David Medberry wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > >> >> What can and should the TC at large, and you specifically, do to ensure >> quality improves for the developers, end-users and operators of >> OpenStack as a full system, both as a project be

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] support for 'python setup.py install'

On 04/24/2015 08:12 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > In our pbr integration tests we ensure that 'python setup.py install' > works, as well as ensuring that 'pip install' works. But see > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-September/015525.html > - for the last 18 months in pbr we'v

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] support for 'python setup.py install'

On 04/25/2015 09:49 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-04-25 12:12:15 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: > [...] >> I'd like to make that a little more official: >> - put it in our docs >> - stop testing python setup.py install. > [...] > > And emit a clear error message? (Even if that just m

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] support for 'python setup.py install'

p(name='foobar', > version='1.0', > description='Foobar', > ) > > > -- > Kind Regards, > Dave Walker > > > On 25 April 2015 at 15:27, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 04/25/2015 09:49 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] support for 'python setup.py install'

On 04/25/2015 11:46 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 04/25/2015 11:33 AM, Dave Walker wrote: >> I'm not going to pretend it is graceful... but is there a situation >> where _" isn't correct? > > Ooh. This is a worthy avenue to explore ... Ok. After some chatti

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] New fedora 21 Atomic images available for testing

On 04/26/2015 02:21 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: > Excerpts from Steven Dake (stdake)'s message of 2015-04-23 23:27:00 +: >> Hi folks, >> >> I have spent the last couple of days trying to bring some sanity to the >> image building process for Magnum. >> >> I have found a tool which the Atomic ups

Re: [openstack-dev] [swift] Go! Swift!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 04/30/2015 08:06 PM, John Dickinson wrote: > >> On Apr 30, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Jay Pipes >> wrote: >> >> On 04/30/2015 12:40 PM, John Dickinson wrote: >>> Swift is a scalable and durable storage engine for storing >>> unstructured data. It's bee

Re: [openstack-dev] [TC][Keystone] Rehashing the Pecan/Falcon/other WSGI debate

On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote: > Hi all, > > At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a > discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision > at the time was that Pecan was to be the only supported framework and > that for incubation Barb

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] regular releases, and path to 1.0

On 05/04/2015 03:53 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > Hi, I'd like to talk about how often we can and should release pbr, > and what criteria we should use for 1.0. > > tl;dr: release weekly [outside of organisation-wide-freezes], do a 1.0 > immediately. > > pbr, like all our libraries affects everythi

Re: [openstack-dev] [pbr] regular releases, and path to 1.0

On 05/04/2015 04:15 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > On 5 May 2015 at 08:12, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 05/04/2015 03:53 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > >> I'm fine with that in principle - I tend to release personal libraries >> pretty much as soon as something int

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][operators] How to specify Keystone v3 credentials?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/04/2015 08:47 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > > > On 05/04/2015 10:37 PM, Rich Megginson wrote: >> On 05/04/2015 07:52 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote: >>> On 2015-05-04 9:15 PM, Rich Megginson wrote: On 05/04/2015 06:03 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] who is the ptl of trove?

On 05/08/2015 03:45 AM, Nikhil Manchanda wrote: > > Comments and answers inline. > > Li Tianqing writes: > >> [...] > >>1) why we put the trove vm into user's tenant, not the trove's >>tenant? User can login on that vm, and that vm must connect to >>rabbitmq. It is quite insecure. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] Allow passing body for more API methods

On 05/11/2015 02:05 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Rosa, Andrea (HP Cloud Services) < > andrea.r...@hp.com> wrote: > >>> Agreed. Violating the HTTP spec is something that should be avoided. >> >> Actually it is not violating the HTTP spec, from RFC: >> " A payload with

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] [nova] keystonauth catalog work arounds hiding transition issues

On 02/27/2017 09:36 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:26 AM, Sean Dague > wrote: > > On 02/27/2017 10:22 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > > > I agree we should kill the discovery hack, however that is a break in > > the keystoneauth c

[openstack-dev] Zuul v3 - What's Coming: What to expect with the Zuul v3 Rollout

Hi everybody! This content can also be found at http://inaugust.com/posts/whats-coming-zuulv3.html - but I've pasted it in here directly because I know that some folks don't like clicking links. tl;dr - At last week's OpenStack PTG, the OpenStack Infra team ran the first Zuul v3 job, so it's time

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][keystone] Tempest will use Keystone v3 API as the default

On 03/07/2017 01:02 PM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: > Hi, > > This is a kind of notification as the mail title. > > Now QA-team is trying to test most recent stable APIs which are marked > as CURRENT in most components. > The investigation is written on > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tempest-api-

[openstack-dev] [cinder][glance][horizon][keystone][nova][qa][swift] Feedback needed: Removal of legacy per-project vanity domain redirects

Hey all, We have a set of old vanity redirect URLs from back when we made a URL for each project: cinder.openstack.org glance.openstack.org horizon.openstack.org keystone.openstack.org nova.openstack.org qa.openstack.org swift.openstack.org They are being served from an old server we'd like to r

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance][horizon][keystone][nova][qa][swift] Feedback needed: Removal of legacy per-project vanity domain redirects

On 03/08/2017 10:31 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:12:59AM -0600, Monty Taylor wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> We have a set of old vanity redirect URLs from back when we made a URL >> for each project: >> >> cinde

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][appcat] The future of the App Catalog

On 03/10/2017 10:59 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2017-03-09 21:53:58 -0800: >> Renat Akhmerov wrote: >>> On 10 Mar 2017, at 06:02, Zane Bitter >>> > wrote: On 08/03/17 11:23, David Moreau Simard wrote: > The App Cata

Re: [openstack-dev] What do we want to be when we grow up?

On 03/10/2017 11:39 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > > * Interoperability - kept as is (though I can't really say how many > public clouds there are anymore to interoperate with). There are plenty. As Dan Smith will tell you, I'm fond of telling people just how many OpenStack Public Cloud accounts I h

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

On 03/15/2017 03:13 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 03/14/2017 05:01 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: >> Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2017-03-14 15:30:32 -0400: >>> On 03/14/2017 02:50 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: On Tue, Mar 14 2017, Jay Pipes wrote: > Not tooz, because I'm not interested in a D

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][kolla][openstack-helm][tripleo][all] Storing configuration options in etcd(?)

On 03/15/2017 12:05 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > So just fyi, this has been talked about before (but prob in context of > zookeeper or various other pluggable config backends). > > Some links: > > - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243114/ > - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243182/ > - https://bl

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][kolla][openstack-helm][tripleo][all] Storing configuration options in etcd(?)

On 03/14/2017 06:04 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Team, > > So one more thing popped up again on IRC: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo.config_etcd_backend > > What do you think? interested in this work? > > Thanks, > Dims > > PS: Between this thread and the other one about Tooz/DLM and >

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

add etcd3 support, we just change tooz to support etcd3, add the devstack jobs to use that, and start from a position that doesn't involve dealing with any legacy? > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 03/15/2017 03:13 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> On 03

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

On 03/15/2017 01:48 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > On 15 March 2017 at 12:33, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 03/15/2017 08:10 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >>> On 15 March 2017 at 11:58, Jay Pipes wrote: >>>> On 03/15/2017 07:44 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>>>> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

On 03/15/2017 02:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 03/15/2017 11:37 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>> Monty, Team, >>> >>> Sorry for the top post: >>> >>> Support for etcd/tooz

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

On 03/15/2017 02:44 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15 2017, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > >> Yep, jd__ and i confirmed that things work with 3.x > > Though to be clear, what's used in tooz is the v2 HTTP API, not the new > v3 gRPC API. But if it conceptually works with v3 server using v2 htt

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

On 03/15/2017 02:52 PM, Louis Taylor wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Julien Danjou wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15 2017, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> >>> Yep, jd__ and i confirmed that things work with 3.x >> >> Though to be clear, what's used in tooz is the v2 HTTP API, not the new >> v3 gRPC AP

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][osc] What name to use for magnum commands in osc?

On 03/20/2017 05:39 PM, Hongbin Lu wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Dean Troyer [mailto:dtro...@gmail.com] >> Sent: March-20-17 5:19 PM >> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][osc] What name to use for magnum >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][osc] What name to use for magnum commands in osc?

On 03/20/2017 08:16 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: >>> [Hongbin Lu] >>> I think the style would be more consistent if all the resources are >>> qualified or un-qualified, not the mix of both. > >> So -

[openstack-dev] Release Naming for R - it's that time again!

Hey everybody, It's your favorite time of the year - it's time for us to pick a name for our "R" release. Since the associated Summit will be in Vancouver, the Geographic Location has been chosen as "British Columbia". Nominations are now open. Please add suitable names to https://wiki.openstack

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] [infra][security] Encryption in Zuul v3

On 03/22/2017 06:10 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 6:10 PM, James E. Blair wrote: >> David Moreau Simard writes: >> >>> I don't have a horse in this race or a strong opinion on the topic, in >>> fact I'm admittedly not very knowledgeable when it comes to low-level >>> encryptio

Re: [openstack-dev] Arrivederci

On 03/22/2017 07:06 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Friday 24 March 2017 will be my last day working on OpenStack. I'll remove > myself from teams (glance, craton, security, hacking) on Friday and > unsubscribe > from the OpenStack mailing lists. > > I want to thank all of you for the

Re: [openstack-dev] [os-client-config] get_session_endpoint() and Keystone admin endpoint

On 03/19/2017 07:18 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: > Hi all, > > I have developed Yakumo, a pythonic unified OpenStack client library: > > PyPI: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/yakumo > Git: https://github.com/yosshy/python-yakumo Nice library! > and I found that > os_client_config.cloud_config.Cl

Re: [openstack-dev] [kubernetes][go] External OpenStack Cloud Provider for Kubernetes

On 03/24/2017 11:22 AM, Graham Hayes wrote: > On 24/03/17 08:46 -0700, Antoni Segura Puimedon wrote: >> >> >> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 3:59:18 PM UTC+1, Graham Hayes wrote: >> >>On 24/03/17 10:27 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>>Folks, >>> >>>As discussed in the etherpad: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [os-client-config] get_session_endpoint() and Keystone admin endpoint

On 03/24/2017 10:34 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: > Hi Monty, > > Thank you for your reply. > > 2017年3月24日(金) 20:58 Monty Taylor <mailto:mord...@inaugust.com>>: > > On 03/19/2017 07:18 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: > > Hi all, > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [os-client-config] get_session_endpoint() and Keystone admin endpoint

On 03/26/2017 02:55 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: > Hi, > > 2017-03-25 4:54 GMT+09:00 Monty Taylor : >> On 03/24/2017 10:34 AM, Akira Yoshiyama wrote: >>> Hi Monty, >>> >>> Thank you for your reply. >>> >>> 2017年3月24日(金) 20:58 Monty Taylor

Re: [openstack-dev] [kubernetes][go] External OpenStack Cloud Provider for Kubernetes

On 04/02/2017 02:53 PM, Chris Hoge wrote: > Now that the provider has a repository in the OpenStack project > namespace, we need to move over the existing set of issues and pull > requests and create an initial work list for migrating patches and > fixing existing issues. > > I've started up an et

Re: [openstack-dev] [kubernetes][go] External OpenStack Cloud Provider for Kubernetes

On 03/29/2017 03:39 PM, Steve Gordon wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "Davanum Srinivas" >> To: "Chris Hoge" >> Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> , >> "kubernetes-sig-openstack" >> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:28:29 PM >> Subject: Re: [open

[openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] Adding a scenario for shade's functional tests

Hey all! I woke up early this morning and found myself thinking "I clearly don't have enough work on my plate, why don't I add some more?" I'd love to make a gate job that: - Deploys a cloud with openstack-ansible - Runs shade's functional tests against that cloud Which makes me think it just

Re: [openstack-dev] [novaclient] novaclient and httpretty - unable to record

On 04/04/2017 04:43 AM, George Shuklin wrote: Sorry for asking in dev maillist, but it really looks like dev issue. I'm writing application which relies on novaclient, glanceclient, etc. It's almost done, but I thought about adding end to end tests by recording and actual requests and replies

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Switching gate testing to use Ubuntu Cloud Archive

On 04/03/2017 06:06 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: Hello, One of the major sets of issues currently affecting gate testing is Libvirt stability. Elastic-recheck is tracking Libvirt crashes for us and they happen frequently [0][1][2]. These issues appear to only affect Ubuntu Xenial (and not Trusty or C

[openstack-dev] [oslo][requirements][designate][cinder] Reverting eventlet version bump

Hey all, We recently increased the version of eventlet we're using. The bump was driven by python3.5 enablement for oslo.messaging, which is a great thing to have exist. However, it has hard-broken designate - and not just the docs builds like happened for other projects. There is a patch th

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][requirements][designate][cinder] Reverting eventlet version bump

On 04/04/2017 08:37 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Monty, Got a link to "patch that has landed to upstream eventlet that will fix the designate issues"? https://github.com/eventlet/eventlet/commit/78f2ef8a81600d19d6d670803ef73747ab8d81b9 Thanks, Dims On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 9:33

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][requirements][designate][cinder] Reverting eventlet version bump

/4/2017 8:33 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: Hey all, We recently increased the version of eventlet we're using. The bump was driven by python3.5 enablement for oslo.messaging, which is a great thing to have exist. However, it has hard-broken designate - and not just the docs builds like happened for

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Switching gate testing to use Ubuntu Cloud Archive

On 04/04/2017 12:05 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: I mentioned that in a meeting today but for greater visibility... This change in how we gate against LTS raises a question whether what we claim in: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/402940/4/reference/project-testing-interface.rst is still valid. T

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Switching gate testing to use Ubuntu Cloud Archive

On 04/04/2017 12:14 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 09:21:27AM -0700, Clark Boylan wrote: On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, at 06:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 04:06:53PM -0700, Clark Boylan wrote: I have pushed a change to devstack [3] to enable using UCA w

[openstack-dev] [tc] version document for project navigator

Hey all, As per our discussion in today's TC meeting, I have made a document format for reporting versions to the project navigator. I stuck it in the releases repo: https://review.openstack.org/453361 Because there was already per-release information there, and the governance repo did no

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zun]Use 'uuid' instead of 'id' as object ident in data model

On 02/21/2017 07:28 AM, gordon chung wrote: On 21/02/17 01:28 AM, Qiming Teng wrote: in mysql[2]. Can someone remind me the benefits we get from Integer over UUID as primary key? UUID, as its name implies, is meant to be an identifier for a resource. Why are we generating integer key values?

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zun]Use 'uuid' instead of 'id' as object ident in data model

point. Yes! Very well said. UUID is the excellent choice for API - auto-inc is the excellent choice for the database. 2017-04-05 22:00 GMT+09:00 Monty Taylor : On 02/21/2017 07:28 AM, gordon chung wrote: On 21/02/17 01:28 AM, Qiming Teng wrote: in mysql[2]. Can someone remind me the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][TripleO][release][deployment] Packaging problems due to branch/release ordering

The tone of this in inappropriate and not in keeping with our community code of conduct: https://www.openstack.org/legal/community-code-of-conduct/ It is neither friendly, patient, welcoming, considerate or respectful. No attempt has been made to collaborate openly on a solution, or to unders

[openstack-dev] Emails for OpenStack R Release Name voting going out - please be patient

Hey all! I've started the R Release Name poll and currently am submitting everyone's email address to the system. In order to not make our fine friends at Carnegie Mellon (the folks who run the CIVS voting service) upset, I have a script that submits the emails one at a time with a half-secon

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >