On 13/01/15 21:24 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 01/13/2015 04:55 PM, Boden Russell wrote:
Looking for some feedback from the glance dev team on a potential BP…
The use case I’m trying to solve is —
As an admin, I want my glance image bits replicated to multiple store
locations (of the same store
John Griffith wrote:
Also just to reiterate something that Sean pointed out that's bugged
me for a while proliferation of channels and what I view as
limited usage of openstack-dev. Honestly I think it's more
detrimental to have all the silos of communication going on as opposed
to all
On 1/14/15 1:38 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 13/01/15 21:24 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 01/13/2015 04:55 PM, Boden Russell wrote:
Looking for some feedback from the glance dev team on a potential BP…
This is the solution that I would recommend. Frankly, this kind of
replication should be an
On 2015-01-13 18:02:41 + (+), Louis Taylor wrote:
This would be great, since it avoids the scheduling and which
channel have we moved to questions when a different slot is
required.
Yep, once every team has its meeting in a separate channel, they'll
all be Tuesday at 1900 UTC and you
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:54:13AM -0700, John Griffith wrote:
I'd echo all the points made regarding logging shouldn't be a
problem; we're an Open Source project so the idea of our communication
being public making anybody nervous and not wanting to participate
seems really off to me. Yes
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kuvaja, Erno kuv...@hp.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Dave Walker [mailto:em...@daviey.com]
Sent: 13 January 2015 15:10
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On 13
-Original Message-
From: Dave Walker [mailto:em...@daviey.com]
Sent: 13 January 2015 15:10
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On 13 January 2015 at 12:32, Kuvaja, Erno kuv...@hp.com wrote:
I'm
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2015-01-13 18:02:41 + (+), Louis Taylor wrote:
This would be great, since it avoids the scheduling and which
channel have we moved to questions when a different slot is
required.
Yep, once every team has its
On 2015-01-13 13:59:26 -0500 (-0500), Sean Dague wrote:
Which is a really important point. I hang in the 3 meeting channels,
[...]
Ahem, it's four now BTW. ;)
--
Jeremy Stanley
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not
On 01/13/2015 01:25 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-01-13 18:02:41 + (+), Louis Taylor wrote:
This would be great, since it avoids the scheduling and which
channel have we moved to questions when a different slot is
required.
Yep, once every team has its meeting in a separate
On 01/13/2015 04:55 PM, Boden Russell wrote:
Looking for some feedback from the glance dev team on a potential BP…
The use case I’m trying to solve is —
As an admin, I want my glance image bits replicated to multiple store
locations (of the same store type) during a glance create operation.
Kuvaja, Erno kuv...@hp.com writes:
I'm heavily against the public logging to the level that I will just
leave the channel if that will be enabled. My point is not foul
language and I do understand that there could be some benefits out of
it. Personally I think we have enough tracked public
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:32:23PM +, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
I think the major benefits of this defined audience are:
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way that is for public.
( Misunderstandings can be corrected on the fly if needed. ) There is no
need to explain to anyone
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 08:27:58AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
On 01/13/2015 08:01 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way that is for public. (
Misunderstandings can be corrected on the fly if needed. ) There is no
need to
not do it with the options available nowadays.
- Erno (jokke_) Kuvaja
-Original Message-
From: Nikhil Komawar [mailto:nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com]
Sent: 05 January 2015 19:11
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way that is for public. (
Misunderstandings can be corrected on the fly if needed. ) There is no need
to explain to anyone reading the logs what you actually meant during the
conversation month ago.
2) there is
On 01/13/2015 08:01 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way that is for public. (
Misunderstandings can be corrected on the fly if needed. ) There is no need
to explain to anyone reading the logs what you actually meant during
On 01/13/2015 08:23 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org]
Sent: 13 January 2015 13:02
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need
On 13/01/15 08:27 -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
On 01/13/2015 08:01 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way that is for public. (
Misunderstandings can be corrected on the fly if needed. ) There is no need to
explain to anyone
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Yep, there have been a number of occassions when conversations that are
relevant to my work have taken place on IRC channels for projects that
I don't normally participate in. It would have been useful to be able
to see the logs and in some cases
-Original Message-
From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org]
Sent: 13 January 2015 13:02
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
1) One does not need to express themselves in a way
On 13 January 2015 at 12:32, Kuvaja, Erno kuv...@hp.com wrote:
I'm heavily against the public logging to the level that I will just leave
the channel if that will be enabled. My point is not foul language and I do
understand that there could be some benefits out of it. Personally I think we
0, 1, 2, and 3. 3 channels. I think Sean has this correct.
On 1/13/15, 14:36, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 01/13/2015 03:07 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-01-13 13:59:26 -0500 (-0500), Sean Dague wrote:
Which is a really important point. I hang in the 3 meeting channels,
[...]
On 01/13/2015 03:07 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-01-13 13:59:26 -0500 (-0500), Sean Dague wrote:
Which is a really important point. I hang in the 3 meeting channels,
[...]
Ahem, it's four now BTW. ;)
Like I said, I hang out in 3 meeting channels. :)
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
*From:* David Stanek [dsta...@dstanek.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 07, 2015 4:43 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
It's also important to remember
+1 to Flavio's proposal.
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Flavio Percoco [fla...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 3:16 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On 09/01/15 12:11
There's really no way to _force_ official logging on all
project-related channels. People who are opposed to the idea simply
move their conversations to new channels. They'll straddle the line
between somewhat official looking and official enough to require
logging.
--
Jeremy Stanley
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
It's also important to remember that IRC channels are typically not
private and are likely already logged by dozens of people anyway.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Christopher Aedo ca
From: David Stanek [dsta...@dstanek.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 4:43 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
It's also important to remember that IRC channels are typically not private and
are likely already
It's also important to remember that IRC channels are typically not private
and are likely already logged by dozens of people anyway.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Christopher Aedo ca...@mirantis.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
Fully
the need of meetings where decisions and
more relevant/important topics are discussed.
From: Anita Kuno [ante...@anteaya.info]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 10:42 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
Fully agree... I don't see how enable logging should be a limitation
for freedom of thought. We've used it in Zaqar since day 0 and it's
bee of great help for all of us.
The logging does not remove the need of meetings
; please do not take me any other way.
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Anita Kuno [ante...@anteaya.info]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 10:42 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On 01/05/2015 06:42 AM, Cindy
| -Original Message-
| From: Morgan Fainberg [mailto:morgan.fainb...@gmail.com]
| Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 11:58 AM
| To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
|
|
|
| On Jan 5, 2015, at 08:07, Nikhil Komawar
. I do admit it is used less frequently than the meeting logs.
--Morgan
Sent via mobile
From: Anita Kuno [ante...@anteaya.info]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 10:42 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC
, January 05, 2015 11:57 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
On Jan 5, 2015, at 08:07, Nikhil Komawar nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com wrote:
Based on the feedback received, we would like to avoid logging on the project
| To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
|
|
|
| On Jan 5, 2015, at 08:07, Nikhil Komawar nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com
| wrote:
|
| Based on the feedback received, we would like to avoid logging on the
| project channel
Thanks Cindy!
Glance cores, can you all please pitch in?
-Nikhil
From: Cindy Pallares [cpalla...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 12:28 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] IRC logging
I've made
On 01/05/2015 06:42 AM, Cindy Pallares wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to re-open the discussion on IRC logging for the glance
channel. It was discussed on a meeting back in November[1], but it
didn't seem to have a lot of input from the community and it was not
discussed in the mailing list. A
to be if such functionality is
desired.
- Erno
From: Nikhil Komawar [mailto:nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com]
Sent: 17 December 2014 20:34
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in use?
Guess that's
, December 17, 2014 2:07 PM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in
use?
I was assuming atomic increment/decrement operations, in which case I'm
not sure I see the race conditions. Or is atomism
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting
images in use?
__ __
Guess that's a implementation detail. Depends on the way you go
about using what's available now, I suppose
Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting
images in use?
__ __
Guess that's a implementation detail. Depends on the way you go
about using what's available now, I suppose.
__ __
Thanks
That's unfortunately too simple. You run into one of two cases:
1. If the job automatically removes the protected attribute when an image
is no longer in use, then you lose the ability to use protected on images
that are not in use. I.e., there's no way to say, nothing is currently
using this
: Chris St. Pierre [chris.a.st.pie...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 10:23 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in use?
That's unfortunately too simple. You run into one of two cases:
1
:* Wednesday, December 17, 2014 10:23 AM
*To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in
use?
That's unfortunately too simple. You run into one of two cases:
1. If the job automatically removes the protected
(not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in use?
I was assuming atomic increment/decrement operations, in which case I'm not
sure I see the race conditions. Or is atomism assuming too much?
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Nikhil Komawar
Just set the images to is_public=False as an admin and they'll disappear
from everyone except the admin.
-jay
On 12/16/2014 03:09 PM, Chris St. Pierre wrote:
Currently, with delay_delete enabled, the Glance scrubber happily
deletes whatever images you ask it to. That includes images that are
The goal here is protection against deletion of in-use images, not a
workaround that can be executed by an admin. For instance, someone without
admin still can't do that, and someone with a fat finger can still delete
images in use.
Don't lose your data is a fine workaround for taking backups,
On 12/16/2014 04:23 PM, Chris St. Pierre wrote:
The goal here is protection against deletion of in-use images, not a
workaround that can be executed by an admin. For instance, someone
without admin still can't do that, and someone with a fat finger can
still delete images in use.
Then set the
+1
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Jay Pipes [jaypi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 4:33 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in use?
On 12/16/2014 04:23 PM, Chris St. Pierre
Hi Chris,
Are you looking for the 'protected' attribute? You can mark an image
with 'protected'=True, then the image can't be deleted by accidentally.
On 17/12/14 10:23, Chris St. Pierre wrote:
The goal here is protection against deletion of in-use images, not a
workaround that can be
No, I'm looking to prevent images that are in use from being deleted. In
use and protected are disjoint sets.
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Fei Long Wang feil...@catalyst.net.nz
wrote:
Hi Chris,
Are you looking for the 'protected' attribute? You can mark an image with
'protected'=True,
Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Option to skip deleting images in use?
No, I'm looking to prevent images that are in use from being deleted. In use
and protected are disjoint sets.
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Fei Long Wang
feil
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 05:12:31PM EST, Chris St. Pierre wrote:
No, I'm looking to prevent images that are in use from being deleted. In
use and protected are disjoint sets.
I have seen multiple cases of images (and snapshots) being deleted while
still in use in Nova, which leads to some very,
A simple solution that wouldn’t require modification of glance would be a cron
job
that lists images and snapshots and marks them protected while they are in use.
Vish
On Dec 16, 2014, at 3:19 PM, Collins, Sean sean_colli...@cable.comcast.com
wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 05:12:31PM EST,
)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Deprecating osprofiler option 'enabled'
in favour of 'profiler_enabled'
Except for the fact that the person who implemented this was told to
change the option name in other projects because it conflicted with a
different option. We can keep this if we’re worried
On 02/12/14 12:16 +0800, Zhi Yan Liu wrote:
Why not change other services instead of glance? I see one reason is
glance is the only one service use this option name, but to me one
reason to keep it as-it in glance is that original name makes more
sense due to the option already under profiler
I totally agreed to make it to be consistent cross all projects, so I
propose to change other projects.
But I think keeping it as-it is clear enough for both developer and
operator/configuration, for example:
[profiler]
enable = True
instead of:
[profiler]
profiler_enable = True
Tbh, the
On 27/11/14 11:34 +0200, Peter Penchev wrote:
Hi,
Hm, looks like I was a bit confused as to the procedure of submitting
a blueprint and a spec for a new Glance image backend driver - and
yeah, the actual text of the Reviewers section of the spec should
have made me at least ask on the list...
On 25/11/14 20:16 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Hi all,
Please consider this email as a nomination for Erno and Alex (CC) for adding
them to the list of Glance core reviewers. Over the last cycle, both of them
have been doing good work with reviews, participating in the project
discussions as
+1 for both! Congrats :)
On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Nikhil Komawar
nikhil.koma...@rackspace.commailto:nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com wrote:
Hi all,
Please consider this email as a nomination for Erno and Alex (CC) for adding
them to the list of Glance core reviewers. Over the last cycle,
It is quite possible that the requirement for glance to own images can be
achieved by having a glance tenant in cinder, and using clone and
volume-transfer functionalities in cinder to get copies to the right place.
I know there is some attempts to move away from the single glance tenant
model
On 19/11/14 15:21 +0800, henry hly wrote:
In the Previous BP [1], support for iscsi backend is introduced into
glance. However, it was abandoned because of Cinder backend
replacement.
The reason is that all storage backend details should be hidden by
cinder, not exposed to other projects.
I think that having a stand-alone (client of cinder) rich data streaming
service (http put/get with offset support, which can be used for
conventional glance plus volume upload/download directly), and rich
data-source semantics exposed so that it can be used in an optimal way
by/for nova, need
Hi Flavio,
Thanks for your information about Cinder Store, Yet I have a little
concern about Cinder backend: Suppose cinder and glance both use Ceph
as Store, then if cinder can do instant copy to glance by ceph clone
(maybe not now but some time later), what information would be stored
in
Please, abstain to send review requests to the mailing list
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-September/015264.html
Thanks,
Flavio
Hi All,
On 18/11/14 17:42 +, Kekane, Abhishek wrote:
Greetings!!!
Can anyone please review this patch [1].
It requires one more
On 18/11/14 18:55 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
We've had a few responses to this poll however, they do not seem to cover the
entire set of developers including many of the cores and developers who are
going to be actively working on the features this cycle.
Based on the responses received, I'd
Hi Maxim,
Thanks for showing interest in this aspect. Like nova-specs, Glance also needs
a spec to be create for discussion related to the blueprint.
Please try to create one here [1]. Additionally you may join us at the meeting
[2] if you feel stuck or need clarifications.
[1]
the intent was of a (possible)
discussion/clarification.
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Flavio Percoco [fla...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 3:59 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance
Hi Nikhil,
Thank you for your response and advice. I'm currently creating the spec
and will publish a review for it shortly.
Best,
Maxim
19.11.2014 18:15, Nikhil Komawar пишет:
Hi Maxim,
Thanks for showing interest in this aspect. Like nova-specs, Glance also needs
a spec to be create for
Hey Henry/Folks,
I think it could make sense for Glance to store the volume UUID, the idea
is that no matter where an image is stored it should be *owned* by Glance
and not deleted out from under it. But that is more of a single tenant vs
multi tenant cinder store.
It makes sense for Cinder to
IIUC, the blueprint just want to add a new image format, and no code
change in Glance, is it? If that's the case, I'm wondering if we really
need a blueprint/spec. Because the image format could be configured in
glance-api.conf. Please correct me if I missed anything. Cheers.
On 20/11/14 02:27,
be reflected in release
notes and such so good to have a spec/BP.
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Fei Long Wang [feil...@catalyst.net.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 4:39 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Parallels
We've had a few responses to this poll however, they do not seem to cover the
entire set of developers including many of the cores and developers who are
going to be actively working on the features this cycle.
Based on the responses received, I'd like to propose a (unified - no
alternating)
On 2014-11-13 18:28:14 +0100 (+0100), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
[...]
I think those who maintain glance_store module in downstream
distributions will cherry-pick the security fix into their
packages, so there is nothing to do in terms of stable branches to
handle the security issue.
[...]
As a
On 14/11/14 11:25 +, stuart.mcla...@hp.com wrote:
On 2014-11-13 18:28:14 +0100 (+0100), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
[...]
I think those who maintain glance_store module in downstream
distributions will cherry-pick the security fix into their
packages, so there is nothing to do in terms of
Hi Ajaya,
We'r making some progress on sync-ing the latest Oslo-incubator code in Glance.
It's a little more tricky due to the property protection feature so, we've had
some impedance. Please give your feedback at:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/127923/3
Please let me know if you've any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 13/11/14 18:17, stuart.mcla...@hp.com wrote:
All,
The 0.1.9 version of glance_store, and glance's master branch both
contain some fixes for the Swift multi-tenant store.
This security related change hasn't merged to glance_store yet:
)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Policy file not reloaded after changes
Hi Ajaya,
We'r making some progress on sync-ing the latest Oslo-incubator code in Glance.
It's a little more tricky due to the property protection feature so, we've had
some impedance. Please give your feedback
On 2014-11-13 18:28:14 +0100 (+0100), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
[...]
I think those who maintain glance_store module in downstream
distributions will cherry-pick the security fix into their
packages, so there is nothing to do in terms of stable branches to
handle the security issue.
[...]
As a
by an upgrade from Icehouse - Juno.
I'll hopefully be able to give this a try today.
Fla.
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Tom Fifield [t...@openstack.org]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 9:26 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance
On 28/10/14 22:18 +, Jesse Cook wrote:
On 10/27/14, 6:08 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/27/2014 06:18 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
In the glance mini-summit there was a request for some documentation on
the architecture ideas I was discussing relating to: 1) removing data
On 10/31/14, 3:21 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 28/10/14 22:18 +, Jesse Cook wrote:
On 10/27/14, 6:08 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/27/2014 06:18 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
In the glance mini-summit there was a request for some documentation
on
the
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Permissions differences for glance
image-create between Icehouse and Juno
On 31/10/14 04:57 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Hi Jay,
Wanted to clarify a few things around this:
1. are you using --is_public
FYI, this has been made effective as of earlier this week. Please be on the
look out for any mysteriously failing tests in your specs...
Thanks,
-Nikhil
From: Nikhil Komawar [nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:31 PM
To:
Thanks for bringing this up, Nikhil.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Here's a poll [0] to find what time-slots work best for everyone as well as
for the interest to remove the alternating time-slot aspect in the schedule.
Could this poll be expanded with a wider range of times? I'm
]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 6:08 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Poll for change in weekly meeting time.
Thanks for bringing this up, Nikhil.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Here's a poll [0] to find what
On 10/27/14, 6:08 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/27/2014 06:18 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
In the glance mini-summit there was a request for some documentation on
the architecture ideas I was discussing relating to: 1) removing data
consistency as a concern for glance 2)
On 29 October 2014 11:18, Jesse Cook jesse.c...@rackspace.com wrote:
At the risk of having something thrown at me, what I am suggesting is a
move away from Glance as a service to Glance as a purely functional API.
At some point caching would need to be discussed, but I am intentionally
Just my two cents, since I won't be able to make it to summit:
When the artifact repository was proposed, I personally really liked the idea
that images
were just another artifact type eventually, even if they stayed separate for
the time being.
However, the pros that you bring up do seem to
On 10/27/2014 06:18 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
In the glance mini-summit there was a request for some documentation on
the architecture ideas I was discussing relating to: 1) removing data
consistency as a concern for glance 2) bootstraping vs baking VMs
Here's a rough draft:
This was covered in the release notes for glance, under Upgrade notes:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNotes/Juno#Upgrade_Notes_3
* The ability to upload a public image is now admin-only by default. To
continue to use the previous behaviour, edit the publicize_image flag in
Right, but as you can read below, I'm using an admin to do the operation...
Which is why I'm curious what exactly I'm supposed to do :)
-jay
On 10/27/2014 09:04 PM, Tom Fifield wrote:
This was covered in the release notes for glance, under Upgrade notes:
Sorry, early morning!
I can confirm that in your policy.json there is:
publicize_image: role:admin,
which seems to match what's needed :)
Regards,
Tom
On 28/10/14 10:18, Jay Pipes wrote:
Right, but as you can read below, I'm using an admin to do the operation...
Which is why I'm
On 10/24/2014 01:40 PM, stuart.mcla...@hp.com wrote:
All,
On my devstack setup neither image upload or image download work
for the Swift multi-tenant store in Juno (I'm getting E500s).
I'd be interested if someone can confirm.
With these changes upload/download worked for me:
glance
On 09:11 Thu 23 Oct , Flavio Percoco wrote:
According to the use-cases explained in this thread (also in the emails
from John and Mathieu) this is something that'd be good having. I'm
looking forward to seeing the driver completed.
As John mentioned in his email, we should probably sync
On 10/24/2014 03:29 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
On 09:11 Thu 23 Oct , Flavio Percoco wrote:
According to the use-cases explained in this thread (also in the emails
from John and Mathieu) this is something that'd be good having. I'm
looking forward to seeing the driver completed.
As John
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014, at 07:59 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 10/24/2014 03:29 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
On 09:11 Thu 23 Oct , Flavio Percoco wrote:
According to the use-cases explained in this thread (also in the emails
from John and Mathieu) this is something that'd be good having. I'm
On 10/22/2014 04:46 PM, Zhi Yan Liu wrote:
Replied in inline.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/22/2014 02:30 PM, Zhi Yan Liu wrote:
Greetings,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
Back in Havana
901 - 1000 of 1327 matches
Mail list logo
