Not rooting for any approach here, just want to add a bit of factors which
might play a role when deciding which way to go:
A) Performance matters, we should be improving simplicity and speed of
deployments rather than making it heavier. If the deployment time and resource
consumption is not
thing that you're
talking about, but it might be a step in that direction.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/173645/
On 04/17/2015 09:50 AM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi All,
at the moment we are building discovery, deploy and overcloud images all
at once. Then we face user to deal with uploading all
Hi All,
at the moment we are building discovery, deploy and overcloud images all
at once. Then we face user to deal with uploading all images at one step.
User should not be exposed to discovery/deploy images. This should
happen automatically for the user during undercloud installation as
.
Expect that it is standard glance functionality.
-Original Message-
From: Jaromir Coufal [mailto:jcou...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 8:51 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Building images separation and moving images
into right place
On 11/11/14 09:30, Jiri Tomasek wrote:
On 11/10/2014 12:19 PM, Matthias Runge wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 01:13:48PM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
Hi,
tl;dr: how to progreed in separating horizon and openstack_dashboard
About a year ago now we agreed, it makes sense to separate horizon and
On 12/11/14 02:45, Richard Jones wrote:
I have set up a doodle poll to let folk enter their preferred times.
It's in UTC/GMT (/London time, because doodle) so use something like
http://everytimezone.com/ to figure that out :)
https://doodle.com/47h3f35nad62ncnf
Richard
Quick Question:
Hello folks,
I apologize that I missed the previous meeting due to some urgency. I
wanted to ask Liz to handle the meeting for me but she was not around
(vacation). I hope you at least managed to chat a bit about ongoing
stuff anyway.
Next week (July 28) I am not around, but I will ask
Hi Wan,
thanks for great notes. My response is inline:
On 2014/15/07 23:19, Wan-yen Hsu wrote:
The Register Nodes panel uses IPMI user and IPMI Password.
However, not all Ironic drivers use IPMI, for instance, some Ironic
drivers will use iLO or other BMC interfaces instead of IPMI. I would
On 2014/15/07 20:29, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-07-15 07:15:12 +:
On 2014/10/07 22:19, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-07-09 07:51:56 +:
Hey folks,
after few rounds of reviews and feedbacks, I am sending
On 2014/10/07 22:19, Gregory Haynes wrote:
Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-07-09 07:51:56 +:
Hey folks,
after few rounds of reviews and feedbacks, I am sending wireframes,
which are ready for implementation in Juno:
Hi Devananda,
thank you for your great feedback and notes. Few reactions follow inline:
On 2014/10/07 21:29, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
Awesome! Glad to see the progress since the design summit.
Some comments:
- slide 1 shows some driver-specific input fields. We have work in
progress to
Dear all,
Red Hat is happy to host a dinner during TripleO/Heat mid-cycle which
should be held on Wednesday, July 23rd.
I would like to invite each attendee of the meetup and ask you to fill
yourselves into the relevant section at the end of the following
etherpad by the end of Wednesday
Hey folks,
after few rounds of reviews and feedbacks, I am sending wireframes,
which are ready for implementation in Juno:
http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/juno/2014-07-09_nodes-ui_juno.pdf
Let me know in case of any questions.
Cheers
-- Jarda
Hi UXers,
this is a reminder that our next regular IRC meeting is happening on
Monday, July 7th at 17:00 UTC at #openstack-meeting-3.
Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/UX
Feel free to add topics which you are interested in.
See you all there
-- Jarda
Thanks a lot for your help.
Just a side note - we need to fill in the number of requested rooms, so
that we don't get charged for extra cost - we have a group discount price.
So for everybody, please, go forward and book your room here:
http://tinyurl.com/redhat-marriott
-- Jarda
On
On 2014/19/06 09:58, Matthias Runge wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:55:59AM +0200, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
My quick questions are:
* Who would be interested (and able) to get to the meeting?
* What topics do we want to discuss?
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/horizon-juno-meetup
Thanks
Hello folks,
there were few discussions about meeting during the cycle and discuss
ongoing issues, progress and next steps of bigger topics.
As long as it is pretty late announcement, I don't think (and I guess we
agreed) that it doesn't worth to organize a special event just for
Horizon.
Hi all,
I would like to remind you to sign up for mid-cycle meetup which is
happening July 21-25 in Raleigh:
* https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-midcycle-meetup
We need number of participants as soon as possible so that we can ask
for group discount at the hotel. Also if we don't get
Hi UXers,
this is a reminder that our next regular IRC meeting is happening
tomorrow (Wednesday) June 18th at 14:30 UTC at #openstack-meeting-3.
Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/UX
Feel free to add topics which you are interested in.
See you all tomorrow
-- Jarda
Hm, strange.
I have contributed in Icehouse but didn't get the e-mail fro voting. I
wanted to vote from the link which you provided but it didn't work for
me - you already voted from given key.
Can anybody help?
Thanks
-- Jarda
On 2014/10/06 21:18, Radomir Dopieralski wrote:
Hello
Hello folks,
I am happy to announce, that based on previous etherpad gathering, mails
and discussions, on the weekly meeting we confirmed final dates for
TripleO mid-cycle meetup:
July 21-25 (Monday-Friday)
Red Hat office, Raleigh, North Carolina
I will be working on another
On 2014/10/06 10:25, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-06-08 16:44:58 -0700:
Hi,
it looks that there is no more activity on the survey for mid-cycle
dates so I went forward to evaluate it.
I created a table view into the etherpad [0] and results are following:
and proceed forward with the organization for the meetup?
Thanks for all the interest
-- Jarda
[0] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-midcycle-meetup
On 2014/28/05 13:05, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi to all,
after previous TripleO Ironic mid-cycle meetup, which I believe was
beneficial
before or on
July the 25th - and I'm going to put that in the etherpad now :0
-Rob
On 3 June 2014 04:51, Ben Nemec openst...@nemebean.com wrote:
On 05/30/2014 06:58 AM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
On 2014/30/05 10:00, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
Excerpt from Zane Bitter's message on 29/05/2014 20:57:10
On 2014/30/05 22:37, James Polley wrote:
On 30 May 2014, at 8:13 pm, Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi All,
I would like to propose to add Tuskar as a permanent topic to the agenda for
our weekly IRC meetings. It is an official TripleO's project, there happening
quite a lot
Hi All,
I would like to propose to add Tuskar as a permanent topic to the agenda
for our weekly IRC meetings. It is an official TripleO's project, there
happening quite a lot around it and we are targeting for Juno to have
something solid. So I think that it is important for us to regularly
On 2014/30/05 02:08, James Slagle wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote:
As I was reviewing this patch today:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96160/
It occurred to me that the tuskar project is part of the tripleo
program:
Hi UXers,
I just wanted to remind all, that on Monday June 2, 2014 at 1700 UTC we
are starting with OpenStack UX meetings (#openstack-meeting-3).
More details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/UX
I'd like to ask all participants if you could write your time zones
here:
. That said, I'll try to make the TripleO sprint
as well -- assuming the dates don't overlap.
Cheers,
Devananda
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com
mailto:jcou...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi to all,
after previous TripleO Ironic mid-cycle meetup, which I believe
,
Devananda
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi to all,
after previous TripleO Ironic mid-cycle meetup, which I believe
was beneficial for all, I would like to suggest that we meet again
in the middle of Juno cycle to discuss current progress
On 2014/30/05 10:00, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
Excerpt from Zane Bitter's message on 29/05/2014 20:57:10:
From: Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 29/05/2014 20:59
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Ironic] [Heat] Mid-cycle
collaborative meetup
snip
Hey Mainn,
mostly it is driven by following requirements:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-ui
plus what you already know from Tuskar point of view - which is simply
monitoring, monitoring, monitoring :)
Hope it helps
-- Jarda
On 2014/29/05 05:51, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hi Jarda,
not sure how much of a problem this is.
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com
mailto:jcou...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi to all,
after previous TripleO Ironic mid-cycle meetup, which I believe
was beneficial for all, I would like to suggest that we meet again
Hi to all,
after previous TripleO Ironic mid-cycle meetup, which I believe was
beneficial for all, I would like to suggest that we meet again in the
middle of Juno cycle to discuss current progress, blockers, next steps
and of course get some beer all together :)
Last time, TripleO and
Hi All,
There is a lot of tags in the subject of this e-mail but believe me that
all listed projects (and even more) are relevant for the designs which I
am sending out.
Nodes management section in Horizon is being expected for a while and
finally I am sharing the results of designing
Dear UXers,
I am happy with your interest in regular OpenStack UX IRC meetings.
Based on the poll (http://doodle.com/3m29dkn3ef2em5in), there are few
slots which fit majority of interested people. Unfortunately few other
teams took empty slots in the meantime so I had to pick first free slot
Apologies, the time was already in conflict with other meetings. But I
managed to find a slot for the one on Monday, so the kick-off meeting
will be:
* Monday, June 2, 2014 at 17000 UTC
* openstack-meeting-3
One more time apologies for this change
-- Jarda
On 2014/23/05 12:58, Jaromir Coufal
Hi,
I am currently improving UI designs for node management via Ironic based
on the feedback from OpenStack Summit. In the Infrastructure dashboard,
there are basic views for nodes, but at this moment it is handled via
nova-baremetal (when we implemented these views, Ironic was not ready
Hello everybody interested in UX,
for one more time, I am reminding that there is ongoing survey for times
which will work for you regarding regular OpenStack UX IRC meetings:
http://doodle.com/3m29dkn3ef2em5in
Cheers
-- Jarda
On 2014/06/05 17:27, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hello UX folks,
I
Hello UX folks,
I am following the initial discussion about tools proposal. Everybody
blessed UX IRC meetings so I am starting an initiative to organize them.
At this moment, I would like to ask everybody interested in the meeting
to participate in a survey and mark times which will work for
Thanks all for great feedback, I will try to do a short summary:
Wiki
Wiki page is obvious and easy consensus for us. It should contain all
important information about UX, such as how to contribute, where to
go to start, various links, etc.
Mailing list - [UX]
---
Hey Liz,
thank you very much for taking a time, proposing and covering this
agenda. It looks very good and I am happy that we got two slots for UX
discussions.
I agree with Thierry that we should definitely cover as much UX areas as
possible. Therefore I would like to encourage people from
Dear OpenStack UX community and everybody else who is interested in
OpenStack's user experience,
When there is more contributors appearing in time, I would like us to
establish a formal process of how the UX work should be organized.
Therefore I am suggesting a few tools below for us to be
Hey Chad,
thank you very much for starting this thread.
Let me start with short introduction to my thoughts about OpenStack
Dashboard's direction and our latest work there. I am working towards a
higher goal of having the OpenStack UI a stable, simple and coherent
story for our end users.
On 2014/15/04 23:15, James Slagle wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
I've been watching the nova process, and I think its working out well
- it certainly addresses:
- making design work visible
- being able to tell who has had input
-
On 2014/10/04 19:40, Nachi Ueno wrote:
Hi Jarda
Congratulations
This release and the demo is super awesome!!
Do you have any instruction to install this one?
Thank you, Nachi!
look at Ladislav's response he posted our guideline for installation. If
you have any problems, let us know on
On 2014/10/04 19:40, Nachi Ueno wrote:
Hi Jarda
Congratulations
This release and the demo is super awesome!!
Do you have any instruction to install this one?
Thank you, Nachi!
look at Ladislav's response he posted our guideline for installation. If
you have any problems, let us know on
On 2014/10/04 22:55, Robert Collins wrote:
On 10 April 2014 01:54, Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello OpenStackers,
I would like to share with you non-narrated demo of current version of
'Tuskar-UI' project, which is very close to Icehouse release (one or two
more patches to come
On 2014/11/04 10:27, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 04/10/2014 04:32 PM, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Dear Stackers,
I am happy to announce that yesterday Tuskar UI (TripleO UI) has tagged
branch 0.1.0 for Icehouse release [0].
I put together a narrated demo of all included features [1].
You can find one
Hi Jarda,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
Unfortunately, these instructions aren't very useful if you want to do
an installation based on packages. Something like:
git clone https://git.openstack.org/openstack/tripleo-incubator
$TRIPLEO_ROOT/tripleo-incubator/scripts/devtest.sh --trash-my-machine
Dear Stackers,
I am happy to announce that yesterday Tuskar UI (TripleO UI) has tagged
branch 0.1.0 for Icehouse release [0].
I put together a narrated demo of all included features [1].
You can find one manual part in the whole workflow - cloud
initialization. There is ongoing work on
Hello OpenStackers,
I would like to share with you non-narrated demo of current version of
'Tuskar-UI' project, which is very close to Icehouse release (one or two
more patches to come in).
Tuskar-UI is a user interface based on TripleO approach which allows
user to register nodes
On 2014/09/04 16:31, mar...@redhat.com wrote:
Jarda thanks this was great to watch - seems a lot of things have been
fixed/tweaked in last couple weeks. Is everything running from current
master branches?
marios
Yes, everything what you see is currently in the master branch (last
changes
On 2014/07/04 15:36, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hi all,
One of the topics of discussion during the TripleO midcycle meetup a few weeks
ago was the direction we'd like to take Tuskar during Juno. Based on the ideas
presented there, we've created a tentative list of items we'd like to address:
On 2014/08/04 01:50, Robert Collins wrote:
tl;dr: 3 more core members to propose:
bnemec
greghaynes
jdon
jdon - jdob
+1 for all the folks.
-- Jarda
On 4 April 2014 08:55, Chris Jones c...@tenshu.net wrote:
Hi
+1 for your proposed -core changes.
Re your question about whether we should
On 2014/03/04 13:02, Robert Collins wrote:
Getting back in the swing of things...
Hi,
like most OpenStack projects we need to keep the core team up to
date: folk who are not regularly reviewing will lose context over
time, and new folk who have been reviewing regularly should be trusted
On 2014/27/03 19:04, Jiří Stránský wrote:
On 27.3.2014 18:21, Dougal Matthews wrote:
[snip]
As a side, but related note, I think we should rename the Tuskar client
to whatever name the Tuskar UI gets called. The client will eventually
have feature parity with the UI and thus will have the
Hi OpenStackers,
User interface which is managing the OpenStack Infrastructure is
currently named Tuskar-UI because of historical reasons. Tuskar itself
is a small service, which is giving logic into generating and managing
Heat templates and helps user to model and manage his deployment. The
On 2014/05/03 23:36, Lyle, David wrote:
I'd like to nominate Radomir Dopieralski to Horizon Core. I find his reviews
very insightful and more importantly have come to rely on their quality. He has
contributed to several areas in Horizon and he understands the code base well.
Radomir is also
Hi Tomas,
thanks for the questions, I am replying inline.
On 2014/05/02 11:19, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
On 05/02/14 03:58, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi to everybody,
based on the feedback from last week [0] I incorporated changes in the
wireframes so that we keep them up to date with latest
/2014 08:41 AM, Hugh O. Brock wrote:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 01:50:00AM +0100, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi folks,
thanks everybody for feedback. Based on that I updated
wireframes
and tried to provide a minimum scope for Icehouse timeframe
On 2014/05/02 15:27, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hi,
In parallel to Jarda's updated wireframes, and based on various discussions
over the past
weeks, here are the updated Tuskar requirements for Icehouse:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO/TuskarIcehouseRequirements
Any feedback is
Dear Horizoners,
in last days there were couple of interesting discussions about updating
to Bootstrap 3. In this e-mail, I would love to give a small summary and
propose a solution for us.
As Bootstrap was heavily dependent on Less, when we got rid of node.js
we started to use lesscpy.
On 2014/03/02 12:23, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
My apologies for firing this off and then hiding under the FOSDEM rock.
In light of the points raised by Devananda and Robert, I no longer think
fiddling with the scheduler is the way to go.
Note this was never intended to break/confuse all TripleO
On 2014/03/02 00:21, Robert Collins wrote:
[snip]
However me and Robert, we look to have different opinions on what
'homogeneous' means in our context. I think we should clarify that.
So I think my point is more this:
- either this iteration is entirely limited to homogeneous hardware,
in
://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2fv6vebFhM
On 2014/16/01 01:50, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi folks,
thanks everybody for feedback. Based on that I updated wireframes and
tried to provide a minimum scope for Icehouse timeframe.
http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/2014-01-16_tripleo-ui
On 2014/30/01 12:59, Ladislav Smola wrote:
On 01/30/2014 12:39 PM, Jiří Stránský wrote:
On 01/30/2014 11:26 AM, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
[snip]
I am for implementing support for Heterogeneous hardware properly,
lifeless should post what he recommends soon, so I would rather discuss
that. We
On 2014/30/01 19:29, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Wouldn't lying about the hardware specs when registering nodes be
problematic for upgrades? Users would have
to re-register their nodes.
+1 for problematic area here
One reason why a custom filter feels attractive is that it provides us
with a clear
On 2014/30/01 23:33, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
I was responding based on Treat similar hardware configuration as
equal. When there is a very minor difference in hardware (eg, 1TB vs
1.1TB disks), enrolling them with the same spec (1TB disk) is sufficient
to solve all these issues and mask
On 2014/30/01 21:28, Robert Collins wrote:
On 30 January 2014 23:26, Tomas Sedovic tsedo...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've seen some confusion regarding the homogenous hardware support as the
first step for the tripleo UI. I think it's time to make sure we're all on
the same page.
Here's what
On 2014/31/01 22:03, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
So after reading the replies on this thread, it seems like I (and others
advocating
a custom scheduler) may have overthought things a bit. The reason this route
was
suggested was because of conflicting goals for Icehouse:
a) homogeneous nodes (to
Hi folks,
based on overcloud.yaml file (thanks Rob for pointing me there), I put
together attributes for deployment configuration which should appear in
the UI. Can I ask for a help, to review the list if it is accurate and
if not to correct it?
Awesome, thanks a lot for setting this up, David!
-- Jarda
On 2014/26/01 02:10, Lyle, David wrote:
With meeting logging now available in #openstack-meeting-3, the official
Horizon meeting time is now Tuesdays at 1600 UTC in #openstack-meeting-3.
Looking forward to seeing all Horizon folks
for this suggestion, if we don't get to
agreement of majority by the end of the week, I would call for voting
starting next week.
Thanks
-- Jarda
On 2014/21/01 15:19, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi folks,
when I was getting feedback on wireframes and we talked about Roles,
there were various
On 2014/22/01 19:46, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
- Original Message -
Oh dear user... :)
I'll step a little bit back. We need to agree if we want to name
concepts one way in the background and other way in the UI for user (did
we already agree on this point?). We all know pros and cons.
On 2014/22/01 00:56, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hiya - Resource is actually a Heat term that corresponds to what we're
deploying within
the Overcloud Stack - i.e., if we specify that we want an Overcloud with 1
Controller
and 3 Compute, Heat will create a Stack that contains 1 Controller and 3
On 2014/22/01 00:56, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hiya - Resource is actually a Heat term that corresponds to what we're
deploying within
the Overcloud Stack - i.e., if we specify that we want an Overcloud with 1
Controller
and 3 Compute, Heat will create a Stack that contains 1 Controller and 3
On 2014/22/01 10:00, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
On 2014/22/01 00:56, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hiya - Resource is actually a Heat term that corresponds to what we're
deploying within
the Overcloud Stack - i.e., if we specify that we want an Overcloud
with 1 Controller
and 3 Compute, Heat will create
Oh dear user... :)
I'll step a little bit back. We need to agree if we want to name
concepts one way in the background and other way in the UI for user (did
we already agree on this point?). We all know pros and cons. And I will
still fight for users to get global infrastructure terminology
Hey everybody,
I am sending updated wireframes.
http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/2014-01-22_tripleo-ui-icehouse.pdf
Updates:
* p15-18 for down-scaling deployment
Any questions are welcome, I am happy to answer them.
-- Jarda
On 2014/16/01 01:50, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi
Hi folks,
when I was getting feedback on wireframes and we talked about Roles,
there were various objections and not much suggestions. I would love to
call for action and think a bit about the term for concept currently
known as Role (= Resource Category).
Definition:
Role is a
huge changes.
Cheers
-- Jarda
On 2014/16/01 01:50, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi folks,
thanks everybody for feedback. Based on that I updated wireframes and
tried to provide a minimum scope for Icehouse timeframe.
http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/2014-01-16_tripleo-ui
:50:00AM +0100, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
Hi folks,
thanks everybody for feedback. Based on that I updated
wireframes
and tried to provide a minimum scope for Icehouse timeframe.
http://people.redhat.com/~__jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/__2014-01
On 2014/14/01 21:35, Vitaly Kramskikh wrote:
Hi Jaromir,
2014/1/13 Jaromir Coufal jcou...@redhat.com mailto:jcou...@redhat.com
So what we can do at the moment (until there is some way to specify
which node to remove) is to inform user, which nodes were removed in
the end
On 2014/01/01 03:35, Robert Collins wrote:
So, we've spoken about using containers on baremetal - e.g. the lxc
provider - in the past, and with the [righteously deserved] noise
Docker is receiving, I think we need to have a short
expectation-setting discussion.
Previously we've said that
Hi Jay,
Awesome. I'll just add quick note inline (and sorry for smaller delay):
On 2014/09/01 18:22, Jay Dobies wrote:
I'm trying to hash out where data will live for Tuskar (both long term
and for its Icehouse deliverables). Based on the expectations for
Icehouse (a combination of the
On 2014/12/01 20:40, Jay Pipes wrote:
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 10:28 -0500, Jay Dobies wrote:
So, it's not as simple as it may initially seem :)
Ah, I should have been clearer in my statement - my understanding is that
we're scrapping concepts like Rack entirely.
That was my understanding as
On 2014/15/01 22:33, Jay Dobies wrote:
On 01/15/2014 08:07 AM, James Slagle wrote:
[snip]
I may be misinterpreting, but let me say that I don't think Tuskar
should be building images. There's been a fair amount of discussion
around a Nova native image building service [1][2]. I'm actually
On 2014/13/01 13:15, Ladislav Smola wrote:
The usage of roles is new metric which doesn't exist. It is the most
consumed HW resource (which means if CPU is consumed by 60 % and RAM
or disk are less, then the role usage is 60 %). It would be great to
have such a metric from Ceilometer. However, I
On 2014/13/01 12:20, Ladislav Smola wrote:
[snip of larger amount of text]
- When on the change deployments screen, after making a change but not
yet applying it, how are the projected capacity changes calculated?
I believe we wanted to make just simple algorithm, that was considering,
that
1) Check for an already deleted server before deleting any. This is
related to stack convergence:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/stack-convergence
This will allow users to just delete a server they want to delete,
and then update the template to reflect reality.
2) Allow resources
On 2014/13/01 16:45, Jiří Stránský wrote:
[snip]
The other approach is just to scale the number of nodes in a role and
let system decide the best match (which node profile is chosen will be
decided on the best fit, probably).
Hmm i'm not sure i understand - what do you think by best fit here?
Hi folks,
thanks everybody for feedback. Based on that I updated wireframes and
tried to provide a minimum scope for Icehouse timeframe.
http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/2014-01-16_tripleo-ui-icehouse.pdf
Hopefully we are able to deliver described set of features. But if
Hi Jeff,
many thanks for great feedback. Few comments are inline:
On 2014/10/01 16:16, Walls, Jeffrey Joel (Cloud OS RD) wrote:
Jarda,
I love how this is progressing. It will be very nice once it's implemented!
The iconography seems to be inconsistent. The ! triangle is used for error
Hi Jay,
thanks for your questions, they are great. I am going to answer inline:
On 2014/10/01 17:18, Jay Dobies wrote:
Thanks for recording this. A few questions:
- I'm guessing the capacity metrics will come from Ceilometer. Will
Ceilometer provide the averages for the role or is that
On 2014/10/01 19:02, Dougal Matthews wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the wireframes and the walkthrough. Very useful. I've a few
comments.
- I'd like to echo the comments from the recording about Role I think
the term probably isn't specific enough but I don't have a great
suggestion. However, this is
On 2014/10/01 21:17, Jay Dobies wrote:
Another question:
- A Role (sounds like we're moving away from that so I'll call it
Resource Category) can have multiple Node Profiles defined (assuming I'm
interpretting the + and the tabs in the Create a Role wireframe
correctly). But I don't see
Hi everybody,
there is first stab of Deployment Management section with future
direction (note that it was discussed as a scope for Icehouse).
I tried to add functionality in time and break it down to steps. This
will help us to focus on one functionality at a time and if we will be
in time
So basically this is our first proposal what we send out:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-December/022196.html
After Horizon meetings, several e-mails and also couple of other
discussions of people who are for/against codebase merge, it looks that
in the end upstream
Hi All,
After yesterday's weekly meeting it seems that majority of us is leaning
towards this approach (codebase merge). However there are few concerns
regarding speed of development and resources especially for reviews.
With this e-mail, I'd like to kick off discussion about how we might
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
