[Openstack-operators] [openlab] October Report

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Here are some highlights from OpenLab for the month of October:

CI additions
  - cluster-api-provider-openstack
  - AdoptOpenJDK
- very important open source project
- many Java developers
- strategic for open source ecosystem

Website redesign completed
  - fielding resource and support requests via GitHub
  - ML sign up via website
  - Community page
  - CI Infrastructure and High level request pipeline still manual but
driven by Google Sheets
  - closer to being fully automated; easier to manage via spreadsheet
instead of website backend

Promotion
  - OSN Day Dallas, November 6th, 2018
https://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/osn_days_2018/north-america/
dallas/
  - Twitter account is live - @askopenlab

Mailing List - https://lists.openlabtesting.org
  - running latest mailman
  - postorious frontend
  - net new members - 7

OpenLab Tests
  (October)
- total number of tests run - 3504
  - SUCCESS - 2421
  - FAILURE - 871
  - POST_FAILURE- 72
  - RETRY_LIMIT - 131
  - TIMED_OUT - 9
  - NODE_FAILURE - 0
  - SKIPPED - 0
- 69.0925% : 30.9075% (success to fail/other job ratio)

  (September)
- total number of tests run - 4350
  - SUCCESS - 2611
  - FAILURE - 1326
  - POST_FAILURE- 336
  - RETRY_LIMIT - 66
  - TIMED_OUT - 11
  - NODE_FAILURE - 0
  - SKIPPED - 0
- 60.0230% : 39.9770% (success to fail/other job ratio)

  Delta
- 9.0695% increase in success to fail/other job ratio
  - testament to great support by Chenrui and Liusheng "keeping the
lights on".

  Additional Infrastructure
- Packet
  - 80 vCPUs, 80G RAM, 1000G Disk
- ARM
  - ARM-based OpenStack Cloud
- Managed by codethink.co.uk
  - single compute node - 96 vCPUs, 128G RAM, 800G Disk
- Massachusetts Open Cloud
  - in progress
  - small project for now
  - academia partner


Build Status Legend:
SUCCESS
job executed correctly and exited without failure
FAILURE
job executed correctly, but exited with a failure
RETRY_LIMIT
pre-build tasks/plays failed more than the maximum number of retry
attempts
POST_FAILURE
post-build tasks/plays failed
SKIPPED
one of the build dependencies failed and this job was not executed
NODE_FAILURE
no device available to run the build
TIMED_OUT
build got stuck at some point and hit the timeout limit

Thank you to everyone who has read through this month’s update. If you have
any question/concerns please feel free to start a thread on the mailing
list or if it is something not to be shared publicly right now you can
email i...@openlabtesting.org

Kind regards,

OpenLab Governance Team


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [user-committee] UC Meeting Reminder

[Melvin Hillsman]

UC meeting in #openstack-uc  at
1800UTC

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-sigs] [all][tc] We're combining the lists! (was: Bringing the community together...)

[Melvin Hillsman]

-- Forwarded message -
From: Samuel Cassiba 
Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-sigs] [all][tc] We're combining the
lists! (was: Bringing the community together...)
To: openstack-dev 


On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:48 PM Doug Hellmann  wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2018-09-20 16:32:49 +:
> > tl;dr: The openstack, openstack-dev, openstack-sigs and
> > openstack-operators mailing lists (to which this is being sent) will
> > be replaced by a new openstack-disc...@lists.openstack.org mailing
> > list.
>
> Since last week there was some discussion of including the openstack-tc
> mailing list among these lists to eliminate confusion caused by the fact
> that the list is not configured to accept messages from all subscribers
> (it's meant to be used for us to make sure TC members see meeting
> announcements).
>
> I'm inclined to include it and either use a direct mailing or the
> [tc] tag on the new discuss list to reach TC members, but I would
> like to hear feedback from TC members and other interested parties
> before calling that decision made. Please let me know what you think.
>
> Doug
>

+1 including the TC list as a tag makes sense to me and my tangent
about intent in online communities.

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


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [all] Naming the T release of OpenStack

[Melvin Hillsman]

I agree with Anita and wonder why Train did not meet the criteria? If there
is no way for Train to be an option outside of killing the voting, than for
the sake of integrity of processes which I have heard quite a few people
hold close to we should drop Train from the list. It is an unfortunate
thing in my view because I am actually a "non-developer" who agreed during
the feedback session that Train would be a great name but Anita is right on
this one imho.

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 10:32 AM Anita Kuno  wrote:

> On 2018-10-18 2:35 a.m., Tony Breeds wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >  As per [1] the nomination period for names for the T release have
> > now closed (actually 3 days ago sorry).  The nominated names and any
> > qualifying remarks can be seen at2].
> >
> > Proposed Names
> >   * Tarryall
> >   * Teakettle
> >   * Teller
> >   * Telluride
> >   * Thomas
> >   * Thornton
> >   * Tiger
> >   * Tincup
> >   * Timnath
> >   * Timber
> >   * Tiny Town
> >   * Torreys
> >   * Trail
> >   * Trinidad
> >   * Treasure
> >   * Troublesome
> >   * Trussville
> >   * Turret
> >   * Tyrone
> >
> > Proposed Names that do not meet the criteria
> >   * Train
> >
> > However I'd like to suggest we skip the CIVS poll and select 'Train' as
> > the release name by TC resolution[3].  My think for this is
> >
> >   * It's fun and celebrates a humorous moment in our community
> >   * As a developer I've heard the T release called Train for quite
> > sometime, and was used often at the PTG[4].
> >   * As the *next* PTG is also in Colorado we can still choose a
> > geographic based name for U[5]
> >   * If train causes a problem for trademark reasons then we can always
> > run the poll
> >
> > I'll leave[3] for marked -W for a week for discussion to happen before
> the
> > TC can consider / vote on it.
> >
> > Yours Tony.
> >
> > [1]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-September/134995.html
> > [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Naming/T_Proposals
> > [3]
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/I0d8d3f24af0ee8578712878a3d6617aad1e55e53
> > [4] https://twitter.com/vkmc/status/1040321043959754752
> > [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_in_Colorado:_T–Z
>
> I stand in opposition to any action that further undermines democracy.
>
> I have avoided events in Denver lately for this reason.
>
> If the support for Train is as universal as is portrayed, the poll with
> show us that.
>
> I don't care what the name is. I do want to participate in the
> selection. The method of participating has heretofore been a poll. I
> have seen no convincing argument to abandon the use of a poll now.
>
> I stand for what democracy there remains. I would like to participate in
> a poll.
>
> Thank you, Anita
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [SIGS] Ops Tools SIG

[Melvin Hillsman]

terday, during the Oslo meeting we discussed [6] the
> possibility
> >> >>>> of creating a new Special Interest Group [1][2] to provide home
> and release
> >> >>>> means for operator related tools [3] [4] [5]
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>all of those tools have python dependencies related to openstack
> such as
> >> >> python-openstackclient or python-pbr. Which is exactly the reason
> why we
> >> >> moved osops-tools-monitoring-oschecks packaging away from OpsTools
> SIG to
> >> >> Cloud SIG. AFAIR we had some issues of having opstools SIG being
> dependent
> >> >> on openstack SIG. I believe that Cloud SIG is proper home for tools
> like
> >> >> [3][4][5] as they are related to OpenStack anyway. OpsTools SIG
> contains
> >> >> general tools like fluentd, sensu, collectd.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Hope this helps,
> >> >> Martin
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Hey Martin,
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure I understand the issue with these tools have
> dependencies on other
> >> > packages and the relationship to SIG ownership. Is your concern (or
> the history
> >> > of a concern you are pointing out) that the tools would have a more
> difficult
> >> > time if they required updates to dependencies if they are owned by a
> different
> >> > group?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!
> >> > Sean
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> the mentioned sigs (opstools/cloud) are in CentOS scope and mention
> >> repository dependencies. That shouldn't bother us here now.
> >>
> >>
> >> There is already a SIG under the CentOS project, providing tools for
> >> operators[7], but also documentation and integrational bits.
> >>
> >> Also, there is some overlap with other groups and SIGs, such as
> >> Barometer[8].
> >>
> >> Since there is already some duplication, I don't know where it makes
> >> sense to have a single group for this purpose?
> >>
> >> If that hasn't been clear yet, I'd be absolutely interested in
> >> joining/helping this effort.
> >>
> >>
> >> Matthias
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [7] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/OpsTools
> >> [8] https://wiki.opnfv.org/collector/pages.action?key=fastpath
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matthias Runge 
> >>
> >> Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
> >> Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
> >> Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham,
> >>  Michael O'Neill, Eric Shander
> >>
> >> ___
> >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Miguel Ángel Ajo
> > OSP / Networking DFG, OVN Squad Engineering
> > ___
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Openstack-sigs] Capturing Feedback/Input

[Melvin Hillsman]

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 11:16 AM Doug Hellmann 
wrote:

> Excerpts from Melvin Hillsman's message of 2018-09-21 10:18:26 -0500:
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 9:41 AM Doug Hellmann 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Excerpts from Melvin Hillsman's message of 2018-09-20 17:30:32 -0500:
> > > > Hey everyone,
> > > >
> > > > During the TC meeting at the PTG we discussed the ideal way to
> capture
> > > > user-centric feedback; particular from our various groups like SIGs,
> WGs,
> > > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > Options that were mentioned ranged from a wiki page to a standalone
> > > > solution like discourse.
> > > >
> > > > While there is no perfect solution it was determined that Storyboard
> > > could
> > > > facilitate this. It would play out where there is a project group
> > > > openstack-uc? and each of the SIGs, WGs, etc would have a project
> under
> > > > this group; if I am wrong someone else in the room correct me.
> > > >
> > > > The entire point is a first step (maybe final) in centralizing
> > > user-centric
> > > > feedback that does not require any extra overhead be it cost, time,
> or
> > > > otherwise. Just kicking off a discussion so others have a chance to
> chime
> > > > in before anyone pulls the plug or pushes the button on anything and
> we
> > > > settle as a community on what makes sense.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I like the idea of tracking the information in storyboard. That
> > > said, one of the main purposes of creating SIGs was to separate
> > > those groups from the appearance that they were "managed" by the
> > > TC or UC. So, rather than creating a UC-focused project group, if
> > > we need a single project group at all, I would rather we call it
> > > "SIGs" or something similar.
> > >
> >
> > What you bring up re appearances makes sense definitely. Maybe we call it
> > openstack-feedback since the purpose is focused on that and I actually
> > looked at -uc as user-centric rather than user-committee; but
> appearances :)
>
> Feedback implies that SIGs aren't engaged in creating OpenStack, though,
> and I think that's the perception we're trying to change.
>
> > I think limiting it to SIGs will well, limit it to SIGs, and again could
> > appear to be specific to those groups rather than for example the Public
> > Cloud WG or Financial Team.
>
> OK, I thought those groups were SIGs.
>
> Maybe we're overthinking the organization on this. What is special about
> the items that would be on this list compared to items opened directly
> against projects?
>

Yeah unfortunately we do have a tendency to overthink/complicate things.
Not saying Storyboard is the right tool but suggested rather than having
something extra to maintain was what I understood. There are at least 3
things that were to be addressed:

- single pane so folks know where to provide/see updates
- it is not a catchall/dumpsite
  - something still needs to be flushed out/prioritized (Public Cloud WG's
missing features spreadsheet for example)
- not specific to a single project (i thought this was a given since there
is already a process/workflow for single project)

I could very well be wrong so I am open to be corrected. From my
perspective the idea in the room was to not circumvent anything internal
but rather make it easy for external viewers, passerbys, etc. When feedback
is gathered from Ops Meetup, OpenStack Days, Local meetups/events, we
discussed putting that here as well.


>
> Doug
>
> ___
> openstack-sigs mailing list
> openstack-s...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-sigs
>

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Capturing Feedback/Input

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

During the TC meeting at the PTG we discussed the ideal way to capture
user-centric feedback; particular from our various groups like SIGs, WGs,
etc.

Options that were mentioned ranged from a wiki page to a standalone
solution like discourse.

While there is no perfect solution it was determined that Storyboard could
facilitate this. It would play out where there is a project group
openstack-uc? and each of the SIGs, WGs, etc would have a project under
this group; if I am wrong someone else in the room correct me.

The entire point is a first step (maybe final) in centralizing user-centric
feedback that does not require any extra overhead be it cost, time, or
otherwise. Just kicking off a discussion so others have a chance to chime
in before anyone pulls the plug or pushes the button on anything and we
settle as a community on what makes sense.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [Openstack-sigs] Open letter/request to TC candidates (and existing elected officials)

[Melvin Hillsman]

You're welcome!

-- 

Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman

mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 5:52 PM Matt Riedemann  wrote:

> On 9/12/2018 5:32 PM, Melvin Hillsman wrote:
> > We basically spent the day focusing on two things specific to what you
> > bring up and are in agreement with you regarding action not just talk
> > around feedback and outreach. [1]
> > We wiped the agenda clean, discussed our availability (set reasonable
> > expectations), and revisited how we can be more diligent and successful
> > around these two principles which target your first comment, "...get
> > their RFE/bug list ranked from the operator community (because some of
> > the requests are not exclusive to public cloud), and then put pressure
> > on the TC to help project manage the delivery of the top issue..."
> >
> > I will not get into much detail because again this response is specific
> > to a portion of your email so in keeping with feedback and outreach the
> > UC is making it a point to be intentional. We have already got action
> > items [2] which target the concern you raise. We have agreed to hold
> > each other accountable and adjusted our meeting structure to facilitate
> > being successful.
> >
> > Not that the UC (elected members) are the only ones who can do this but
> > we believe it is our responsibility to; regardless of what anyone else
> > does. The UC is also expected to enlist others and hopefully through our
> > efforts others are encouraged participate and enlist others.
> >
> > [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/uc-stein-ptg
> > [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/UC-Election-Qualifications
>
> Awesome, thank you Melvin and others on the UC.
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Cinder HA with zookeeper or redis?

[Melvin Hillsman]

Additionally if you require some resources to test this against OpenLab is
a great resource - https://openlabtesting.org provides more info -
https://github.com/theopenlab/resource-requests/issues/new - is where you
can skip having to go through the site to do so

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 3:19 PM Jay S Bryant  wrote:

>
> On 9/9/2018 10:58 PM, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > Hi James,
> >
> > James Penick  wrote:
> >> Hey folks,
> >> Does anyone have experience using zookeeper or redis to handle HA
> >> failover
> >> in cinder clusters?
> >
> > I'm guessing you mean failover of an active/passive cinder-volume
> > service?
> >
> >> I know there's docs on pacemaker, however we already
> >> have the other two installed and don't want to add yet another
> >> component to
> >> package and maintain in our clusters.
> >
> > I'm afraid I don't, but if you make any progress on this, please let
> > me know as it would be great to document:
> >
> >  - how this would work
> >  - any pros and cons vs. Pacemaker
> >
> > and maybe I can help with that.
> >
> > One particular question: if the node running the service becomes
> > unreachable, is it safe to fail it over straight away, or is fencing
> > required first?  (I'm pretty sure I've asked this same question
> > before, but I can't remember the answer - sorry!)
> James,
>
> I echo Adam's input.  I have only heard of people implementing with
> pacemaker but there is no reason that this couldn't be tried with other
> HA solutions.
>
> If you are able to try it and document it would be great to add
> documentation here:  [1]
>
> Also, Gorka Eguileor is a good contact as he has been doing much of the
> work on HA Cinder though his focus is on Active/Active HA.
>
> Let us know if you have any further questions.
>
> Thanks!
> Jay
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing the community together (combine the lists!)

[Melvin Hillsman]

I think the more we can reduce the ML sprawl the better. I also recall us
discussing having some documentation or way of notifying net new signups of
how to interact with the ML successfully. An example was having some
general guidelines around tagging. Also as a maintainer for at least one of
the mailing lists over the past 6+ months I have to inquire about how that
will happen going forward which again could be part of this
documentation/initial message.

Also there are many times I miss messages that for one reason or another do
not hit the proper mailing list. I mean we could dive into the minutia or
start up the mountain of why keeping things the way they are is worst than
making this change and vice versa but I am willing to bet there are more
advantages than disadvantages.

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 4:45 PM Jimmy McArthur  wrote:

>
>
> Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>
> On 2018-08-30 22:49:26 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote:
> [...]
>
> I really don't want this. I'm happy with things being sorted in
> multiple lists, even though I'm subscribed to multiples.
>
> IMO this is easily solved by tagging.  If emails are properly tagged
> (which they typically are), most email clients will properly sort on rules
> and you can just auto-delete if you're 100% not interested in a particular
> topic.
>

Yes, there are definitely ways to go about discarding unwanted mail
automagically or not seeing it at all. And to be honest I think if we are
relying on so many separate MLs to do that for us it is better community
wide for the responsibility for that to be on individuals. It becomes very
tiring and inefficient time wise to have to go through the various issues
of the way things are now; cross-posting is a great example that is
steadily getting worse.


> SNIP
>
> As the years went by, it's become apparent to me that this is
> actually an antisocial behavior pattern, and actively harmful to the
> user base. I believe OpenStack actually wants users to see the
> development work which is underway, come to understand it, and
> become part of that process. Requiring them to have their
> conversations elsewhere sends the opposite message.
>
> I really and truly believe that it has become a blocker for our
> community.  Conversations sent to multiple lists inherently splinter and we
> end up with different groups coming up with different solutions for a
> single problem.  Literally the opposite desired result of sending things to
> multiple lists.  I believe bringing these groups together, with tags, will
> solve a lot of immediate problems. It will also have an added bonus of
> allowing people "catching up" on the community to look to a single place
> for a thread i/o 1-5 separate lists.  It's better in both the short and
> long term.
>

+1


>
> Cheers,
> Jimmy
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: 
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OpenStack PTG!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder that ticket prices will increase to USD $599 on August 22
at 11:59pm PT (August 23 at 6:59 UTC) for the PTG. So purchase your tickets
before the price increases.

Register here: https://denver2018ptg.eventbrite.com <
https://denver2018ptg.eventbrite.com/>

Also the discounted hotel block is filling up if it has not already and the
last date to book in the hotel block is TODAY! so book now here:
www.openstack.org/ptg <http://www.openstack.org/ptg>

PTG questions?, please email ptg at openstack.org <mailto:ptg at
openstack.org>

--
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] getting back onto our IRC channel

[Melvin Hillsman]

I just tried irssi on MacOS without any other stuff added to the config
just a fresh install and I am able to talk to NickServ and appears I can
register the nick if I so choose. Quite possible your IP or an IP along
your path of talking to Freenode is blacklisted Chris.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 2:23 PM iain MacDonnell 
wrote:

>
> According to:
>
>
> https://superuser.com/questions/1220409/irc-how-to-register-on-freenode-using-hexchat-when-i-get-disconnected-immediat
>
> there's a blacklist of source address ranges from which SASL auth/e is
> required.
>
>  ~iain
>
>
>
> On 08/08/2018 12:03 PM, Chris Morgan wrote:
> > I'm sure I'm doing something wrong, but it's really not obvious, hence
> > this email.
> >
> > I tried just "/connect chat.freenode.net
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__chat.freenode.net=DwMFaQ=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE=RxYkIjeLZPK2frXV_wEUCq8d3wvUIvDPimUcunMwbMs=XitLUTp1htaMQO9yd3X4qTLgEaEKYUScTKuga61xBnM=hZAfF36UBBrPqqDYxYnjUXSWNOyfTga0P_lzOaA1Ax0=>"
>
> > and then "/msg nickserv ..." a few times. I always got dumped and it
> > said "You need to identify via SASL to use this server". Something like
> > that.
> >
> > If I don't connect first, then I just get "Not connected to server" when
> > I try to /msg nickserv
> >
> > chris
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 2:57 PM Jeremy Stanley  > <mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org>> wrote:
> >
> > On 2018-08-08 14:43:33 -0400 (-0400), Chris Morgan wrote:
> > [...]
> >  > What did not work for me is trying to msg nickserv from the
> > command-line
> >  > IRC client (irssi). I can't send a message to nickserv without
> > connecting,
> >  > and (it seems to me anyway) can't connect without a nickname.
> > Seems a bit
> >  > chicken and egg to this IRC newbie.
> > [...]
> >
> > It's been a while since I used irssi personally (switched to weechat
> > some 5-6 years ago), but it should only have rejected your ability
> > to auto-join OpenStack official IRC channels until you
> > registered/identified and not prevented you from connecting to
> > Freenode. You only need to be in a server buffer and connected to be
> > able to `/msg nickserv ...` but don't need to be in any channels at
> > all so shouldn't be a chicken-and-egg scenario.
> > --
> > Jeremy Stanley
> > ___
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> > <mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> >
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Doperators=DwMFaQ=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE=RxYkIjeLZPK2frXV_wEUCq8d3wvUIvDPimUcunMwbMs=XitLUTp1htaMQO9yd3X4qTLgEaEKYUScTKuga61xBnM=pOs2IpLof7IqciYxf2K2rTsQ9jqCKkIAlL_mvXqqCDo=
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chris Morgan mailto:mihali...@gmail.com>>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Doperators=DwIGaQ=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE=RxYkIjeLZPK2frXV_wEUCq8d3wvUIvDPimUcunMwbMs=XitLUTp1htaMQO9yd3X4qTLgEaEKYUScTKuga61xBnM=pOs2IpLof7IqciYxf2K2rTsQ9jqCKkIAlL_mvXqqCDo=
> >
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee Meeting @ 1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Reminder about UC meeting in #openstack-uc; please add to agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee @ 1800 UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

UC meeting today in #openstack-uc
Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee

-- 

Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman

mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-community] Openstack package repo

[Melvin Hillsman]

May I suggest install python-pip and then pip install python-swiftclient
(python-openstackclient, python-whateverclient, etc at that point)

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Amy Marrich  wrote:

> Alfredo,
>
> Forwarding this to the OPS list in the hopes of it reaching the
> appropriate folks, but you might also want to checkout the RDO repos
>
> https://trunk.rdoproject.org/centos7/current/
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Amy (spotz)
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Alfredo De Luca <
> alfredo.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all.
>> I have centos/7 on a VM Virtualbox... I want to install all the openstack
>> python clients (nova, swift etc).
>> I installed
>> *yum install centos-release-openstack-queens *
>>
>> and all good but when I try to install one client I have the following
>> error:
>>
>> yum install python-swiftclient
>>
>> **
>> Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
>> Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
>>  * base: mirror.infonline.de
>>  * extras: mirror.infonline.de
>>  * updates: centos.mirrors.psw.services
>> centos-ceph-luminous
>> | 2.9 kB  00:00:00
>> centos-openstack-queens
>>  | 2.9 kB  00:00:00
>> *http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/repodata/repomd.xml
>> <http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/repodata/repomd.xml>:
>> [Errno 14] HTTP Error 404 - Not Found*
>> Trying other mirror.
>> To address this issue please refer to the below wiki article
>>
>> https://wiki.centos.org/yum-errors
>> **
>>
>> Now the only way to install the package (or any other) is to disable that
>> repo
>> *yum-config-manager --disable centos-qemu-ev*
>>
>> then I can install the client...
>>
>> Any idea?
>> It looks like *http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/virt/x86_64
>> <http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/virt/x86_64> doesn't exist.*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Alfredo*
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Community mailing list
>> commun...@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
>>
>>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Today 1800UTC / 1300CST

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please see https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/Us
erCommittee for UC meeting info and add additional agenda items if needed.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

>
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee Meeting - Monday July 2nd @1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

In case you did not get the reminder on Friday afternoon ;)

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

On Fri, Jun 29th, 2018 at 12:59 PM, Melvin Hillsman  
wrote:

> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 
> Please be sure to join us - if not getting ready for firecrackers - on
> Monday July 2nd @1400UTC in #openstack-uc for weekly User Committee
> meeting.
> 
> 
> Also you can freely add to the meeting agenda here - 
> (
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
> )
> 
> 
> 
> Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee - OpenStack (
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
> ) (
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
> ) WIKI.OPENSTACK.ORG (
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
> )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Melvin Hillsman
> mrhills...@gmail.com
> mobile: (832) 264-2646
>___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: Reminder: User Committee Meeting - Monday July 2nd @1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Please be sure to join us - if not getting ready for firecrackers - on
Monday July 2nd @1400UTC in #openstack-uc for weekly User Committee meeting.

Also you can freely add to the meeting agenda here -
Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee - OpenStack
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs>
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs>
WIKI.OPENSTACK.ORG
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs>
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: User Committee Meeting - Monday July 2nd @1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Please be sure to join us - if not getting ready for firecrackers - on Monday 
July 2nd @1400UTC in #openstack-uc for weekly User Committee meeting.

Also you can freely add to the meeting agenda here - 
( 
https://share.polymail.io/v1/z/b/NWIzNjZlYzY4YmFm/a4uka23nadCqVfJyXGVUd8seO-2TVguxjo5CXjMRfv6BfwuOHgsFdwaD5gqm42rq7S0EQJ2MIGcgH9AtUVfEieePkQzsFoAt1OaUgaIp0NtZpZK4dWfyHXTS3KuBASt50Uw1EdlADr41wcc2nQVQpFf9trzWdTHt9_ZjAc0PQrBJvTlG2nXDmvunA1m2N-H8jMIRsejqbpleDwqc7eXzV-xJPvCinnzRWGeMohmiMraUGS3wlftXrtqhmmXCWh0aW0Xrr-GB2aoJBOwSodyJl5DisHXFxMlnk_z6OYrHfl2rU_ByIO4rhUL9zYxT
 )

Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee - OpenStack ( 
https://share.polymail.io/v1/z/b/NWIzNjZlYzY4YmFm/a4uka23nadCqVfJyXGVUd8seO-2TVguxjo5CXjMRfv6BfwuOHgsFdwaD5gqm42rq7S0EQJ2MIGcgH9AtUVfEieePkQzsFoAt1OaUgaIp0NtZpZK4dWfyHXTS3KuBASt50Uw1EdlADr41wcc2nQVQpFf9trzWdTHt9_ZjAc0PQrBJvTlG2nXDmvunA1m2N-H8jMIRsejqbpleDwqc7eXzV-xJPvCinnzRWGeMohmiMraUGS3wlftXrtqhmmXCWh0aW0Xrr-GB2aoJBOwSodyJl5DisHXFxMlnk_z6OYrHfl2rU_ByIO4rhUL9zYxT
 ) ( 
https://share.polymail.io/v1/z/b/NWIzNjZlYzY4YmFm/a4uka23nadCqVfJyXGVUd8seO-2TVguxjo5CXjMRfv6BfwuOHgsFdwaD5gqm42rq7S0EQJ2MIGcgH9AtUVfEieePkQzsFoAt1OaUgaIp0NtZpZK4dWfyHXTS3KuBASt50Uw1EdlADr41wcc2nQVQpFf9trzWdTHt9_ZjAc0PQrBJvTlG2nXDmvunA1m2N-H8jMIRsejqbpleDwqc7eXzV-xJPvCinnzRWGeMohmiMraUGS3wlftXrtqhmmXCWh0aW0Xrr-GB2aoJBOwSodyJl5DisHXFxMlnk_z6OYrHfl2rU_ByIO4rhUL9zYxT
 ) WIKI.OPENSTACK.ORG ( 
https://share.polymail.io/v1/z/b/NWIzNjZlYzY4YmFm/a4uka23nadCqVfJyXGVUd8seO-2TVguxjo5CXjMRfv6BfwuOHgsFdwaD5gqm42rq7S0EQJ2MIGcgH9AtUVfEieePkQzsFoAt1OaUgaIp0NtZpZK4dWfyHXTS3KuBASt50Uw1EdlADr41wcc2nQVQpFf9trzWdTHt9_ZjAc0PQrBJvTlG2nXDmvunA1m2N-H8jMIRsejqbpleDwqc7eXzV-xJPvCinnzRWGeMohmiMraUGS3wlftXrtqhmmXCWh0aW0Xrr-GB2aoJBOwSodyJl5DisHXFxMlnk_z6OYrHfl2rU_ByIO4rhUL9zYxT
 )

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Today 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please see https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/
UserCommittee for UC meeting info and add additional agenda items if needed.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Today 1400UTC / 0900CST

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please see https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/
UserCommittee for UC meeting info and add additional agenda items if needed.


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Monday 1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please see https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/
Foundation/UserCommittee for UC meeting info and add additional agenda
items if needed.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OpenLab Cross-community Impact

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

I know we have sent out quite a bit of information over the past few days
with the OpenStack Summit and other updates recently. Additionally there
are plenty of meetings we all attend. I just want to take time to point to
something very significant in my opinion and again give big thanks to
Chris, Dims, Liusheng, Chenrui, Zhuli, Joe (gophercloud), and anyone else
contributing to OpenLab.

A member of the release team working on the testing infrastructure for
Kubernetes did a shoutout to the team for the following:

(AishSundar)
Shoutout to @dims and OpenStack team for quickly getting their 1.11
Conformance results piped to CI runs and contributing results to
Conformance dashboard !
https://k8s-testgrid.appspot.com/sig-release-1.11-all#Conformance%20-%20OpenStack=

Here is why this is significant and those working on this who I previously
mentioned should get recognition:

(hogepodge)
OpenStack and GCE are the first two clouds that will release block on
conformance testing failures. Thanks @dims for building out the test
pipeline and @mrhillsman for leading the OpenLab efforts that are reporting
back to the test grid. @RuiChen for his contributions to the testing
effort. Amazing work for the last six months.

In other words, if the external cloud provider ci conformance tests we do
in OpenLab are not passing, it will be one of the signals used for blocking
the release. OpenStack and GCE are the first two clouds to achieve this and
it is a significant accomplishment for the OpenLab team and the OpenStack
community overall regarding our relationship with the Kubernetes community.
Thanks again Chris, Dims, Joe, Liusheng, Chenrui, and Zhuli for the work
you have done and continue to do in this space.

Personally I hope we take a moment to really consider this milestone and
work to ensure OpenLab's continued success as we embark on working on other
integrations. We started OpenLab hoping we could make substantial impact
specifically for the ecosystem that builds on top of OpenStack and this is
evidence we can and should do more.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Community Documentation - first anchor point

[Melvin Hillsman]

 > > are a very good toolset in place for testing and publishing
> documents.
> :> > > There are also various text editors for rst extensions available,
> like in
> :> > > vim, notepad++ or also online services. I understand the concerns
> and when
> :> > > people are sad because their patches are ignored for months. But
> it's
> :> > > alltime a question of responsibilty and how can spend people time.
> :> > > I would be available for help. As I18n PTL I could imagine that a
> :> > > OpenStack Operations Guide is available in different languages and
> portable
> :> > > in different formats like in Sphinx. For us as translation team
> it's a good
> :> > > possibility to get feedback about the quality and to understand the
> :> > > requirements, also for other documents.
> :> > > So let's move on.
> :> > >
> :> > > kind regards
> :> > >
> :> > > Frank
> :> > >
> :> > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/30,members
> :> > > [2] https://github.com/openstack/operations-guide
> :> > >
> :> > >
> :> > > Am 2018-05-24 03:38, schrieb Chris Morgan:
> :> > >
> :> > >> Hello Everyone,
> :> > >>
> :> > >> In the Ops Community documentation working session today in
> Vancouver,
> :> > >> we made some really good progress (etherpad here:
> :> > >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not
> all of
> :> > >> the good stuff is yet written down).
> :> > >>
> :> > >> In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the
> Operators
> :> > >> Guide, the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via
> the
> :> > >> wiki and instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a
> :> > >> different, new set of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo.
> :> > >> There was a strong consensus that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow
> :> > >> and that b) openstack core docs tools are just fine.
> :> > >>
> :> > >> There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do
> :> > >> have an offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes
> :> > >> will be allowed to actually land, so we expect to actually start
> :> > >> showing some progress.
> :> > >>
> :> > >> At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow
> along
> :> > >> as various people work out how to do this... and so for now that
> place
> :> > >> is this very email thread. The idea is if the code for those
> documents
> :> > >> goes to live in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up,
> or
> :> > >> if a new version we will announce/discuss it here until such time
> as
> :> > >> we have a better home for this initiative.
> :> > >>
> :> > >> Cheers
> :> > >>
> :> > >> Chris
> :> > >>
> :> > >> --
> :> > >> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
> :> > >> ___
> :> > >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> :> > >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> :> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack-operators
> :> > >>
> :> > >
> :> > >
> :> > > ___
> :> > > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> :> > > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> :> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack-operators
> :> > >
> :> >
> :
> :___
> :OpenStack-operators mailing list
> :OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> :http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Community Documentation - first anchor point

[Melvin Hillsman]

gt; > >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not all
> of
> > >> the good stuff is yet written down).
> > >>
> > >> In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the Operators
> > >> Guide, the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via the
> > >> wiki and instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a
> > >> different, new set of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo.
> > >> There was a strong consensus that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow
> > >> and that b) openstack core docs tools are just fine.
> > >>
> > >> There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do
> > >> have an offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes
> > >> will be allowed to actually land, so we expect to actually start
> > >> showing some progress.
> > >>
> > >> At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow along
> > >> as various people work out how to do this... and so for now that place
> > >> is this very email thread. The idea is if the code for those documents
> > >> goes to live in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up, or
> > >> if a new version we will announce/discuss it here until such time as
> > >> we have a better home for this initiative.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers
> > >>
> > >> Chris
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
> > >> ___
> > >> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack-operators
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > OpenStack-operators mailing list
> > > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack-operators
> > >
> >
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Community Documentation - first anchor point

[Melvin Hillsman]

Also, apologies, if consolidation or reorganizing all these is reasonable,
what do you think that would look like; i.e.

osops
> tools
>> contrib
>> generic
>> monitoring
>> logging
> docs
> example-configs


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Great to see this moving. I have some questions/concerns based on your
> statement Doug about docs.openstack.org publishing and do not want to
> detour the conversation but ask for feedback. Currently there are a number
> of repositories under osops-
>
> https://github.com/openstack-infra/project-config/blob/
> master/gerrit/projects.yaml#L5673-L5703
>
> Generally active:
> osops-tools-contrib
> osops-tools-generic
> osops-tools-monitoring
>
>
> Probably dead:
> osops-tools-logging
> osops-coda
> osops-example-configs
>
> Because you are more familiar with how things work, is there a way to
> consolidate these vs coming up with another repo like osops-docs or
> whatever in this case? And second, is there already governance clearance to
> publish based on the following - https://launchpad.net/osops - which is
> where these repos originated.
>
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:56 PM, Frank Kloeker <eu...@arcor.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> thanks for summarize our session today in Vancouver. As I18n PTL and one
>> of the Docs Core I put Petr in Cc. He is currently Docs PTL, but
>> unfortunatelly not on-site.
>> I couldn't also not get the full history of the story and that's also not
>> the idea to starting finger pointing. As usualy we moving forward and there
>> are some interesting things to know what happened.
>> First of all: There are no "Docs-Team" anymore. If you look at [1] there
>> are mostly part-time contributors like me or people are more involved in
>> other projects and therefore busy. Because of that, the responsibility of
>> documentation content are moved completely to the project teams. Each repo
>> has a user guide, admin guide, deployment guide, and so on. The small
>> Documentation Team provides only tooling and give advices how to write and
>> publish a document. So it's up to you to re-use the old repo on [2] or
>> setup a new one. I would recommend to use the best of both worlds. There
>> are a very good toolset in place for testing and publishing documents.
>> There are also various text editors for rst extensions available, like in
>> vim, notepad++ or also online services. I understand the concerns and when
>> people are sad because their patches are ignored for months. But it's
>> alltime a question of responsibilty and how can spend people time.
>> I would be available for help. As I18n PTL I could imagine that a
>> OpenStack Operations Guide is available in different languages and portable
>> in different formats like in Sphinx. For us as translation team it's a good
>> possibility to get feedback about the quality and to understand the
>> requirements, also for other documents.
>> So let's move on.
>>
>> kind regards
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/30,members
>> [2] https://github.com/openstack/operations-guide
>>
>>
>> Am 2018-05-24 03:38, schrieb Chris Morgan:
>>
>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>
>>> In the Ops Community documentation working session today in Vancouver,
>>> we made some really good progress (etherpad here:
>>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not all of
>>> the good stuff is yet written down).
>>>
>>> In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the Operators
>>> Guide, the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via the
>>> wiki and instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a
>>> different, new set of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo.
>>> There was a strong consensus that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow
>>> and that b) openstack core docs tools are just fine.
>>>
>>> There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do
>>> have an offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes
>>> will be allowed to actually land, so we expect to actually start
>>> showing some progress.
>>>
>>> At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow along
>>> as various people work out how to do this... and so for now that place
>>> is this very email thread. The idea is if the code for those documents
>>> goes to live in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up, or
>>> 

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Community Documentation - first anchor point

[Melvin Hillsman]

Great to see this moving. I have some questions/concerns based on your
statement Doug about docs.openstack.org publishing and do not want to
detour the conversation but ask for feedback. Currently there are a number
of repositories under osops-

https://github.com/openstack-infra/project-config/blob/master/gerrit/projects.yaml#L5673-L5703

Generally active:
osops-tools-contrib
osops-tools-generic
osops-tools-monitoring


Probably dead:
osops-tools-logging
osops-coda
osops-example-configs

Because you are more familiar with how things work, is there a way to
consolidate these vs coming up with another repo like osops-docs or
whatever in this case? And second, is there already governance clearance to
publish based on the following - https://launchpad.net/osops - which is
where these repos originated.


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:56 PM, Frank Kloeker <eu...@arcor.de> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> thanks for summarize our session today in Vancouver. As I18n PTL and one
> of the Docs Core I put Petr in Cc. He is currently Docs PTL, but
> unfortunatelly not on-site.
> I couldn't also not get the full history of the story and that's also not
> the idea to starting finger pointing. As usualy we moving forward and there
> are some interesting things to know what happened.
> First of all: There are no "Docs-Team" anymore. If you look at [1] there
> are mostly part-time contributors like me or people are more involved in
> other projects and therefore busy. Because of that, the responsibility of
> documentation content are moved completely to the project teams. Each repo
> has a user guide, admin guide, deployment guide, and so on. The small
> Documentation Team provides only tooling and give advices how to write and
> publish a document. So it's up to you to re-use the old repo on [2] or
> setup a new one. I would recommend to use the best of both worlds. There
> are a very good toolset in place for testing and publishing documents.
> There are also various text editors for rst extensions available, like in
> vim, notepad++ or also online services. I understand the concerns and when
> people are sad because their patches are ignored for months. But it's
> alltime a question of responsibilty and how can spend people time.
> I would be available for help. As I18n PTL I could imagine that a
> OpenStack Operations Guide is available in different languages and portable
> in different formats like in Sphinx. For us as translation team it's a good
> possibility to get feedback about the quality and to understand the
> requirements, also for other documents.
> So let's move on.
>
> kind regards
>
> Frank
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/30,members
> [2] https://github.com/openstack/operations-guide
>
>
> Am 2018-05-24 03:38, schrieb Chris Morgan:
>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> In the Ops Community documentation working session today in Vancouver,
>> we made some really good progress (etherpad here:
>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-Ops-Community-Docs but not all of
>> the good stuff is yet written down).
>>
>> In short, we're going to course correct on maintaining the Operators
>> Guide, the HA Guide and Architecture Guide, not edit-in-place via the
>> wiki and instead try still maintaining them as code, but with a
>> different, new set of owners, possibly in a new Ops-focused repo.
>> There was a strong consensus that a) code workflow >> wiki workflow
>> and that b) openstack core docs tools are just fine.
>>
>> There is a lot still to be decided on how where and when, but we do
>> have an offer of a rewrite of the HA Guide, as long as the changes
>> will be allowed to actually land, so we expect to actually start
>> showing some progress.
>>
>> At the end of the session, people wanted to know how to follow along
>> as various people work out how to do this... and so for now that place
>> is this very email thread. The idea is if the code for those documents
>> goes to live in a different repo, or if new contributors turn up, or
>> if a new version we will announce/discuss it here until such time as
>> we have a better home for this initiative.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> --
>> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Monday 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please see
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee for UC
meeting info and add additional agenda items if needed.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Openstack] help

[Melvin Hillsman]

Douaa can you provide details on the error you are getting? Also I am
adding the Operators ML as some more practitioners may be able to see it
from there.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Douaa <zinouba...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello
> I'm trying to use openstack (VIM) on openbaton for that i create to VMs
> one for OpenStack and the second for Opnebaton.
> i have installed packstack on CentOS and Openbaton on ubuntu 16.04. Now
> i'm trying to create VIM Openstack on openbaton but i have erreur there is
> any plugins or configuration i have to do it before creating VIM Openstack ?
>  Thanks for helping
>
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack
> Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [OpenStack] [user-committee] Reminder: UC Meeting 4/23 @ 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting tomorrow in #openstack-uc on
freenode at 18:00UTC

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCo
mmittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting 4/23 @ 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting tomorrow in #openstack-uc on
freenode at 18:00UTC

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCo
mmittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] UC Meeting Reminder - 4/9 @ 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

UC Meeting started :)

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting today in #openstack-uc on freenode
> at 18:00UTC
>
> Agenda:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCo
> mmittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
>
>
> --
> Kind regards,
>
> Melvin Hillsman
> mrhills...@gmail.com
> mobile: (832) 264-2646
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] UC Meeting Reminder - 4/9 @ 1800UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting today in #openstack-uc on freenode
at 18:00UTC

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCo
mmittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Meetup, Co-Location options, and User Feedback

[Melvin Hillsman]

+1

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Jimmy McArthur <ji...@openstack.org> wrote:

> Hi all -
>
> I'd like to check in to see if we've come to a consensus on the colocation
> of the Ops Meetup.  Please let us know as soon as possible as we have to
> alert our events team.
>
> Thanks!
> Jimmy
>
> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
> March 27, 2018 at 11:44 AM
> Hello Everyone,
>   This proposal looks to have very good backing in the community. There
> was an informal IRC meeting today with the meetups team, some of the
> foundation folk and others and everyone seems to like a proposal put
> forward as a sample definition of the combined event - I certainly do, it
> looks like we could have a really great combined event in September.
>
> I volunteered to share that a bit later today with some other info. In the
> meanwhile if you have a viewpoint please do chime in here as we'd like to
> declare this agreed by the community ASAP, so in particular IF YOU OBJECT
> please speak up by end of week, this week.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> --
> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> Jonathan Proulx <j...@csail.mit.edu>
> March 23, 2018 at 10:07 AM
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 09:02:48PM -0700, Yih Leong, Sun. wrote:
> :I support the ideas to try colocating the next Ops Midcycle and PTG.
> :Although scheduling could be a potential challenge but it worth give it a
> :try.
> :
> :Also having an joint social event in the evening can also help Dev/Ops to
> :meet and offline discussion. :)
>
> Agreeing stongly with Matt and Melvin's comments about Forum -vs-
> PTG/OpsMidcycle
>
> PTG/OpsMidcycle (as I see them) are about focusing inside teams to get
> work done ("how" is a a good one word I think). The advantage of
> colocation is for cross team questions like "we're thinking of doing
> this thing this way, does this have any impacts on your work my might
> not have considered", can get a quick respose in the hall, at lunch,
> or over beers as Yih Leong suggests.
>
> Forum has become about coming to gather across groups for more
> conceptual "what" discussions.
>
> So I also thing they are very distinct and I do see potential benefits
> to colocation.
>
> We do need to watch out for downsides. The concerns around colocation
> seemed mostly about larger events costing more and being generally
> harder to organize. If we try we will find out if there is merit to
> this concern, but (IMO) it is important to keep both of the
> events as cheap and simple as possible.
>
> -Jon
>
> :
> :On Thursday, March 22, 2018, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
> <mrhills...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :
> :> Thierry and Matt both hit the nail on the head in terms of the very
> :> base/purpose/point of the Forum, PTG, and Ops Midcycles and here is my
> +2
> :> since I have spoke with both and others outside of this thread and agree
> :> with them here as I have in individual discussions.
> :>
> :> If nothing else I agree with Jimmy's original statement of at least
> giving
> :> this a try.
> :>
> :> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Matt Van Winkle
> <mvanw...@rackspace.com> <mvanw...@rackspace.com>
> :> wrote:
> :>
> :>> Hey folks,
> :>> Great discussion! There are number of points to comment on going back
> :>> through the last few emails. I'll try to do so in line with Theirry's
> :>> latest below. From a User Committee perspective (and as a member of the
> :>> Ops Meetup planning team), I am a convert to the idea of co-location,
> but
> :>> have come to see a lot of value in it. I'll point some of that out as I
> :>> respond to specific comments, but first a couple of overarching points.
> :>>
> :>> In the current model, the Forum sessions are very much about WHAT the
> :>> software should do. Keeping the discussions focused on behavior,
> feature
> :>> and function has made it much easier for an operator to participate
> :>> effectively in the conversation versus the older, design sessions, that
> :>> focused largely on blueprints, coding approaches, etc. These are HOW
> the
> :>> developers should make things work and, now, are a large part of the
> focus
> :>> of the PTG. I realize it's not that cut and dry, but current model has
> :>> allowed for this division of "what" and "how" in many areas, and I

[Openstack-operators] Meeting Reminder - 4/2 @ 1400UTC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting tomorrow in #openstack-uc on
freenode at 14:00UTC

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCo
mmittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] RFC: Next minimum libvirt / QEMU versions for "Solar" release

[Melvin Hillsman]

;)

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Sean McGinnis <sean.mcgin...@gmx.com>
wrote:

> > While at it, we should also discuss about what will be the NEXT_MIN
> > libvirt and QEMU versions for the "Solar" release.  To that end, I've
> > spent going through different distributions and updated the
> > DistroSupportMatrix Wiki[2].
> >
> > Taking the DistroSupportMatrix into picture, for the sake of discussion,
> > how about the following NEXT_MIN versions for "Solar" release:
> >
> Correction - for the "Stein" release. :)
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Meetup, Co-Location options, and User Feedback

[Melvin Hillsman]

isrupt the current spirit of the sessions
> Theirry describes above
>
> The Forum format, on the other hand, is organized around specific
> discussion topics where you want to maximize feedback and input. Forum
> sessions are not attached to a specific workgroup or team, they are
> defined by their topic. They are well-advertised on the event schedule,
> and happen at a precise time. It takes advantage of the thousands of
> attendees being present to get the most relevant feedback possible. It
> allows to engage beyond the work groups, to people who can't spend much
> time getting more engaged and contribute back.
>
> Agreed.  Again, I over simplified as the "what", but these sessions are so
> valuable as the bring dev and ops in a room and focus on what the software
> needs to do or the impact (positive or negative) that planned behaviors
> might have on Operators and users.  To Tim's earlier question, no I think
> this change doesn't reduce the need for Forum sessions.  If anything, I
> think it increases the need for us to get REALLY good at channeling output
> from the Ops mid-cycle in to session topics at the next Summit.
>
> The Ops meetup under its current format is mostly work sessions, and
> those would fit pretty well in the PTG event format. Ideally I would
> limit the feedback-gathering sessions there and use the Forum (and
> regional events like OpenStack days) to collect it. That sounds like a
> better way to reach out to "all users" and take into account their
> feedback and needs...
>
> They are largely work sessions, but independent of the co-location
> discussion, the UC is focused on improving the ability for tangible output
> to come from Ops mid-cycles, OpenStack Days and regional meetups - largely
> in the form of Forum sessions and ultimately changes in the software.  So
> we, as a committee, see a lot of similarities in what you just said.  I'm
> not bold enough to predict exactly how co-location might change the
> tone/topic of the Ops sessions, but I agree that we shouldn't expect a lot
> of real-time feedback time with devs at the PTG/mid-summit event (what ever
> we end up calling it).  We want the devs to be focused on what's already
> planned for the N+1 version or beyond.  The conversations/sessions at the
> Ops portion of the event would hopefully lead to Forum sessions on N+2
> features, functions, bug fixes, etc
>
> Overall, I still see co-location as a positive move.  There will be some
> tricky bits we need to figure out between to the "two sides" of the event
> as we want to MINIMIZE any perceived us/them between dev and ops - not add
> to it.  But, the work session themselves, should still honor the spirit of
> the PTG and Ops Mid-cycle as they are today.  We just get the added benefit
> of time together as a whole community - and hopefully solve a few
> logistic/finance/sponsorship/venue issues that trouble one event or the
> other today.
>
> Thanks!
> VW
> --
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> openstack-operators
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [forum] We want your session ideas for the Vancouver Forum!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please take time to put ideas for sessions at the forum in the TC and/or UC
catch-all etherpads or any of the others that are appropriate:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Vancouver2018

We really want to get as many session ideas as possible so that the
committee has too many to choose from :)

Here is an idea of the types of sessions to think about proposing:

*Project-specific sessions*

Where developers can ask users specific questions about their experience,
users can provide feedback from the last release and cross-community
collaboration on the priorities and 'blue sky' ideas for the next release
can occur.

*Strategic, whole-of-community discussions*

To think about the big picture, including beyond just one release cycle and
new technologies

*Cross-project sessions*

In a similar vein to what has happened at past design summits, but with
increased emphasis on issues that are of relevant to all areas of the
community


If you have organized any events in the past year you probably have heard
of or been in some sessions that are perfect for the Forum.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [forum] We want your session ideas for the Vancouver Forum!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please take time to put ideas for sessions at the forum in the TC and/or UC
catch-all etherpads or any of the others that are appropriate:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Vancouver2018

We really want to get as many session ideas as possible so that the
committee has too many to choose from :)

Here is an idea of the types of sessions to think about proposing:

*Project-specific sessions*

Where developers can ask users specific questions about their experience,
users can provide feedback from the last release and cross-community
collaboration on the priorities and 'blue sky' ideas for the next release
can occur.
*Strategic, whole-of-community discussions*

To think about the big picture, including beyond just one release cycle and
new technologies
*Cross-project sessions*

In a similar vein to what has happened at past design summits, but with
increased emphasis on issues that are of relevant to all areas of the
community


If you have organized any events in the past year you probably have heard
of or been in some sessions that are perfect for the Forum.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Stable Branch EOL and "Extended Maintenance" Resolution

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

I believe this resolution is getting close to being passed and so I highly
suggest anyone interested provide any feedback they have
good/bad/indifferent -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/548916/3/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.rst

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Anne Bertucio <a...@openstack.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Given our conversations this morning at the Ops Midcycle about Extended
> Maintenance, particularly how projects individually deciding stable
> maintenance policies would affect operators, I wanted to pop this to the
> top of your inbox again. The thread is actively moving, so it’d be good to
> get your operator input in there: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/548916/
>
>
> Anne Bertucio
> OpenStack Foundation
> a...@openstack.org | irc: annabelleB
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 7, 2018, at 1:16 PM, Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for pointing this one out!
>
> Chris
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:53 PM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> If you are interested in the items in the subject please be sure to take
>> time to review and comment on the following patch -
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/548916/
>>
>> --
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Melvin Hillsman
>> mrhills...@gmail.com
>> mobile: (832) 264-2646
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Chris Morgan <mihali...@gmail.com>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder: UC Meeting Today - 14:00 UTC #openstack-uc

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Friendly reminder we have a UC meeting today in #openstack-uc on freenode
at 14:00UTC

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/
UserCommittee#Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Stable Branch EOL and "Extended Maintenance" Resolution

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

If you are interested in the items in the subject please be sure to take
time to review and comment on the following patch -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/548916/

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] User Committee Elections

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

We had to push the voting back a week if you have been keeping up with the
UC elections[0]. That being said, election officials have sent out the poll
and so voting is now open! Be sure to check out the candidates -
https://goo.gl/x183he - and get your vote in before the poll closes.

[0] https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-feb2018.html

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] Stepping aside announcement

[Melvin Hillsman]

Thanks for your service to the community Edgar! Hope to see you at an event
soon and we can toast to your departure and continued success!

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Amy Marrich <a...@demarco.com> wrote:

> Edgar,
>
> Thank you for all your hard work and contributions!
>
> Amy (spotz)
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Community,
>>
>>
>>
>> This is an overdue announcement but I was waiting for the right moment
>> and today it is with the opening of the UC election. It has been almost
>> seven years of full commitment to OpenStack and the entire ecosystem around
>> it. During the last couple of years, I had the opportunity to serve as
>> Chair of the User Committee. I have participated in this role with nothing
>> more important but passion and dedication for the users and operators.
>> OpenStack has been very important for me and it will be always the most
>> enjoyable work I have ever done.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is time to move on. Our team is extending its focus to other cloud
>> domains and I will be leading one of the those. Therefore, I would like to
>> announce that I am stepping aside from my role as UC Chair. Per our UC
>> election, there will be no just 2 seats available but three:
>> https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-feb2018.html
>>
>>
>>
>> I want to encourage the whole AUC community to participate, be part of
>> the User Committee is a very important and grateful activity. Please, go
>> for it!
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Edgar Magana
>>
>> Sr. Principal Architect
>>
>> Workday, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> User-committee mailing list
>> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>>
>>
>
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OpenStack Individual BoD Elections

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

 

Just a friendly reminder that the Individual BoD elections has started. Please 
take time to consider all the candidates and vote accordingly:

https://www.openstack.org/election/2018-individual-director-election/CandidateList

 

You should have your ballot via the email associated with your OpenStack 
Foundation profile.

 

-- 

Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman

mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: +1 (832) 264-2646

irc: mrhillsman

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ohayo! Q1 2018

[Melvin Hillsman]

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/TYO-ops-meetup-2018


​

Hey everyone,

What do you think about the new logo! Just a friendly reminder that the Ops
Meetup for Spring 2018 is approaching March 7-8, 2018 in Tokyo and we are
looking for additional topics.

Spring 2018 will have NFV+General on day one and Enterprise+General on day
two. Add additional topics to the etherpad or +/- 1 those already proposed.

Additionally if you are attending and would like to moderate a session, add
your name to the moderator list near the bottom of the etherpad.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [Openstack] Certifying SDKs

[Melvin Hillsman]

+1 to editing the sheet as well and because you are spot on with your 
assessment of what I meant; scenarios we can “guarantee” an SDK allows/affords 
a tool to deliver on.
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: +1 (832) 264-2646
irc: mrhillsman

On 12/15/17, 1:53 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" <dava...@gmail.com> wrote:

Joe,

+1 to edit the sheet directly.

Thanks,
Dims

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Joe Topjian <j...@topjian.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been meaning to reply to this thread. Volodymyr, your reply reminded 
me
> :)
>
> I agree with what you said that the SDK should support everything that the
> API supports. In that way, one could simply review the API reference docs
> and create a checklist for each possible action. I've often thought about
> doing this for Gophercloud so devs/users can see its current state of 
what's
> supported and what's missing.
>
> But Melvin highlighted the word "guaranteed", so I think he's looking for
> the most common scenarios/actions rather than an exhaustive list. For 
that,
> I can recommend the suite of Terraform acceptance tests. I've added a test
> each time a user has either reported a bug or requested a feature, so
> they're scenarios that I know are being used "in the wild".
>
> You can find these tests here:
> 
https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-openstack/tree/master/openstack
>
> Each file that begins with "resource" and ends in "_test.go" will contain
> various scenarios at the bottom. For example, compute instances:
> 
https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-openstack/blob/master/openstack/resource_openstack_compute_instance_v2_test.go#L637-L1134
>
> This contains tests for:
>
> * Basic launch of an instance
> * Able to add and remove security groups from an existing instance
> * Able to boot from a new volume or an existing volume
> * Able to edit metadata of an instance.
> * Able to create an instance with multiple ephemeral disks
> * Able to create an instance with multiple NICs, some of which are on the
> same network, some of which are defined as ports.
>
> Terraform is not an SDK, but it's a direct consumer of Gophercloud and is
> more user-facing, so I think it's quite applicable here. The caveat being
> that if Terraform or Gophercloud does not support something, it's not
> available as a test. :)
>
> Melvin, if this is of interest, I can either post a raw list of these
> tests/scenarios here or edit the sheet directly.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Volodymyr Litovka <doka...@gmx.com> 
wrote:
>>
>> Hi Melvin,
>>
>> isn't SDK the same as Openstack REST API? In my opinion (can be 
erroneous,
>> though), SDK should just support everything that API supports, providing
>> some basic checks of parameters (e.g. verify compliancy of passed 
parameter
>> to IP address format, etc) before calling API (in order to decrease load 
of
>> Openstack by eliminating obviously broken requests).
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> On 12/11/17 8:35 AM, Melvin Hillsman wrote:
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> On the path to potentially certifying SDKs we would like to gather a list
>> of scenarios folks would like to see "guaranteed" by an SDK.
>>
>> Some examples - boot instance from image, boot instance from volume,
>> attach volume to instance, reboot instance; very much like InterOp works 
to
>> ensure OpenStack clouds provide specific functionality.
>>
>> Here is a document we can share to do this -
>> 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cdzFeV5I4Wk9FK57yqQmp5JJdGfKzEOdB3Vtt9vnVJM/edit#gid=0
>>
>> --
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Melvin Hillsman
>> mrhills...@gmail.com
>> mobile: (832) 264-2646
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list:
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>> Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org
>> Unsubscribe :
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>>
>>
>> --
>> Volodymyr Litovka
>>   "Vision without Execution is Hallucination." -- Thomas Edison
>>
>>
>> __

Re: [Openstack-operators] thierry's longer dev cycle proposal

[Melvin Hillsman]

I think this is a good opportunity to allow some stress relief to the developer 
community and offer space for more discussions with operators where some 
operators do not feel like they are bothering/bugging developers. I believe 
this is the main gain for operators; my personal opinion. In general I think 
the opportunity costs/gains are worth it for this and it is the responsibility 
of the community to make the change be useful as you mentioned in your original 
thread Thierry. It is not a silver bullet for all of the issues folks have with 
the way things are done but I believe that if it does not hurt things and 
offers even a slight gain in some area it makes sense.

Any change is not going to satisfy/dis-satisfy 100% of the constituents.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: +1 (832) 264-2646
irc: mrhillsman

On 12/13/17, 4:39 PM, "Jeremy Stanley" <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote:

On 2017-12-13 22:35:41 +0100 (+0100), Thierry Carrez wrote:
[...]
> It's not really fait accompli, it's just a proposal up for discussion at
> this stage. Which is the reason why I started the thread on -dev -- to
> check the sanity of the change from a dev perspective first. If it makes
> things harder and not simpler on that side, I don't expect the TC to
> proceed.
[...]

With my TC hat on, regardless of what impression the developer
community has on this, I plan to take subsequent operator and
end-user/app-dev feedback into account as well before making any
binding decisions (and expect other TC members feel the same).
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators




___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Certifying SDKs

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

On the path to potentially certifying SDKs we would like to gather a list
of scenarios folks would like to see "guaranteed" by an SDK.

Some examples - boot instance from image, boot instance from volume, attach
volume to instance, reboot instance; very much like InterOp works to ensure
OpenStack clouds provide specific functionality.

Here is a document we can share to do this -
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cdzFeV5I4Wk9FK57yqQmp5JJdGfKzEOdB3Vtt9vnVJM/edit#gid=0

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OpenStack Ops Meetup Topic Brainstorming

[Melvin Hillsman]

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/TYO-ops-meetup-2018

Hey everyone,

Just a friendly reminder that the Ops Meetup for Spring 2018 is approaching
March 7-8, 2018 in Tokyo and we are looking for topics. Some have been
gathered already but brainstorming could definitely use some love.

What is different about this meetup compared to others is the addition of
focus areas; tracks. Spring 2018 will have NFV+General on day one and
Enterprise+General on day two. Add additional topics to the etherpad or +/-
1 those already proposed.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] User Committee meeting cancelled for 11/27

[Melvin Hillsman]

Additionally we hang out in #openstack-uc ;)

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> The User Committee meeting scheduled for 11/27 is being cancelled since we
> will not have quorum. Please see the wiki[1] for agenda items that will be
> covered in our next meeting (12/4). Please add any other topics that you
> would like to discuss on our proposed agenda on the wiki page[1].
>
> If there are any items that can not wait until next week, please start an
> email thread on the User Committee mailing list.
>
> Thank you,
> User Committee
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#
> Meeting_Agenda.2FPrevious_Meeting_Logs
>
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Sydney Takeaways - UC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey David,

Nope, no action taken in a separate meeting. I had been thinking about this
for some time from the OpenStack Days China operators event in July as I
mentioned in the session and just wanted to get something down based on
things that had been swirling in my head and some notes I had sitting
around. Feel free to use the Google Doc or not, totally ok. I wanted to be
sure we captured key items from the Summit and got them down in the open to
ensure larger community is aware of what we are working on as UC.


On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 5:07 AM, David Medberry <openst...@medberry.net>
wrote:

> I took an action to work on this bit:
>
>1. "stackalytics" for user community
>
> Closely tied to #5. Assists with non-developers being able to show their
> impact in the community and justify travel amongst other things.
>
>- We should discuss how to make this happen and prioritize
>   - Started a document - https://docs.google.com/docu
>   ment/d/1P4b8A9ybBaEYCu7xwVFt37jcZYzs9taxfNprwKlbdh0
>   
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P4b8A9ybBaEYCu7xwVFt37jcZYzs9taxfNprwKlbdh0>
>
> and will work with Jimmy McArthur. Though maybe Melvin also took an item
> in a separate meeting...
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> Wanted to start a thread for UC specific takeaways from the Summit. Here
>> are the things that stood out and would love additions:
>>
>> UC Top 5 - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SYD-forum-uc - we have
>> discussed previously having goals as a UC and in Sydney we decided to put
>> together a top 5 list; mirroring what the TC has done. We should be able to
>> provide this to the Board, Staff, and TC as needed and continuously update
>> the community on progress. We have not decided on any of these of course
>> but here is what is currently listed.
>>
>>1. LTS
>>   - Conversation is going well via ML
>>   - Our discussion was to allow the folks who want to work on LTS
>>   the chance to do it as they see fit; no exact way but discussion 
>> actively
>>   going on, get involved
>>2. Operator midcycle integration into larger event/feedback ecosystem
>>   - We have as a community made significant changes to ensure user
>>   feedback getting in front of those working on the code earlier than 
>> before
>>   and we have to be sure that we tie into that process as it is designed.
>>   - Mexico City was an edge case of the past few midcycles that have
>>   been community-led but gave great insight into worse case scenario; 
>> what
>>   have we learned and what can we do better?
>>   - How specifically can the Foundation Staff help - again the
>>   biggest need is to ensure tying into bigger ecosystem
>>3. More operator proposed forum sessions
>>   - Very much tied to #2.
>>   4. Vision casting exercise
>>   - TC and documentation team has gone through this exercise; Doug
>>   Hellmann agreed to be available either F2F or via video conference to 
>> do
>>   this with UC
>>   5. Company view of non-developer community participation
>>   - It is easy for companies to hire/organize developers as FTEs for
>>   community work and impact is readily available via quantitative output 
>> from
>>   the community; commits, blueprints, etc.
>>   - It is equally important for companies to allow non-developers -
>>   project managers, product managers, system administrators, developers,
>>   devops engineers, etc - some percentage if not 100% to community work. 
>> It
>>   should not all be personal/volunteer time in order to increase the 
>> velocity
>>   of user community growth and impact.
>>   6. "stackalytics" for user community
>>   - Closely tied to #5. Assists with non-developers being able to
>>   show their impact in the community and justify travel amongst other 
>> things.
>>   - We should discuss how to make this happen and prioritize
>>   - Started a document - https://docs.google.com/docu
>>   ment/d/1P4b8A9ybBaEYCu7xwVFt37jcZYzs9taxfNprwKlbdh0
>>   
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P4b8A9ybBaEYCu7xwVFt37jcZYzs9taxfNprwKlbdh0>
>>7. Joint TC/UC meetings
>>   - Ensuring there is more parity between TC and UC.
>>   - Carrying forward from Boston Forum
>>  - Feel free to crash each others meetings
>>
>> User Survey
>>
>>- One important detail I took 

[Openstack-operators] Sydney Takeaways - UC

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Wanted to start a thread for UC specific takeaways from the Summit. Here
are the things that stood out and would love additions:

UC Top 5 - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/SYD-forum-uc - we have
discussed previously having goals as a UC and in Sydney we decided to put
together a top 5 list; mirroring what the TC has done. We should be able to
provide this to the Board, Staff, and TC as needed and continuously update
the community on progress. We have not decided on any of these of course
but here is what is currently listed.

   1. LTS
  - Conversation is going well via ML
  - Our discussion was to allow the folks who want to work on LTS the
  chance to do it as they see fit; no exact way but discussion
actively going
  on, get involved
   2. Operator midcycle integration into larger event/feedback ecosystem
  - We have as a community made significant changes to ensure user
  feedback getting in front of those working on the code earlier
than before
  and we have to be sure that we tie into that process as it is designed.
  - Mexico City was an edge case of the past few midcycles that have
  been community-led but gave great insight into worse case scenario; what
  have we learned and what can we do better?
  - How specifically can the Foundation Staff help - again the biggest
  need is to ensure tying into bigger ecosystem
   3. More operator proposed forum sessions
  - Very much tied to #2.
  4. Vision casting exercise
  - TC and documentation team has gone through this exercise; Doug
  Hellmann agreed to be available either F2F or via video conference to do
  this with UC
  5. Company view of non-developer community participation
  - It is easy for companies to hire/organize developers as FTEs for
  community work and impact is readily available via quantitative
output from
  the community; commits, blueprints, etc.
  - It is equally important for companies to allow non-developers -
  project managers, product managers, system administrators, developers,
  devops engineers, etc - some percentage if not 100% to community work. It
  should not all be personal/volunteer time in order to increase
the velocity
  of user community growth and impact.
  6. "stackalytics" for user community
  - Closely tied to #5. Assists with non-developers being able to show
  their impact in the community and justify travel amongst other things.
  - We should discuss how to make this happen and prioritize
  - Started a document -
  
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P4b8A9ybBaEYCu7xwVFt37jcZYzs9taxfNprwKlbdh0
   7. Joint TC/UC meetings
  - Ensuring there is more parity between TC and UC.
  - Carrying forward from Boston Forum
 - Feel free to crash each others meetings

User Survey

   - One important detail I took away from the User Survey session was a
   request to move the survey to being held once a year in terms of analysis
   and compilation.
   - Survey is always available to take. Suggestion was to prod community
   every quarter for example to take the survey while only compiling yearly
   report.

OpenLab

   - Initiated by OpenStack Foundation, Huawei, and Intel, currently
   involved companies include Deutsche Telekom and VEXXHOST. OpenLab currently
   is focusing on SDKs moving to define, stabilize, and support official
   OpenStack SDKs. Gophercloud is currently using OpenLab and work is being
   done to add the OpenStack provider for Terraform into the system.
   - Another phase of OpenLab is to tightly integrate with or learn heavily
   from OPNFV's XCI. Currently discussing this with the lead engineer of XCI
   and could possibly lead to re-branding XCI as OpenLab increasing the scope,
   collaboration, and integration of OpenLab components and Open Source
   communities.
   - As the UC, OpenLab is important to us, as it targets the user
   community of OpenStack and other user communities of
   tools/components/applications that work with OpenStack, so we should push
   with the Foundation to ensure it is successful.

Cross-Community Participation

   - gophercloud/terraform/k8s
  - greatly part of OpenLab (gophercloud integrated, terraform almost -
  +unittests/-acceptancetests - researching k8s connection
  - many sessions regarding SIGs of both k8s and OpenStack where many
  folks were interested in increased cross-pollination and not
being redundant
   - OPNFV's XCI - mentioned previously also closely tied to OpenLab -
   first meeting scheduled for Friday 11/17 9-10am CST - reply if interested
   - It makes sense for entire community to look for ways to work more
   closely with other communities relevant to current and future work

SIGs

   - Concern from UC on relevance due to many going to SIGs model - should
   discuss further via ML openstack-sigs with [meta] tag
   - Bi-weekly "newsletter/digest" much like the 

[Openstack-operators] All Day DevOps

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

 

Apologies for delay in sending this out as I have known about it for some time 
and plan on attending one or two sessions:

 

https://www.alldaydevops.com/

 

What is All Day DevOps?

 

FREE online community responsible for creating the world's largest DevOps 
conference.

 

Over 100, 45-minute sessions across six tracks in all time zones, 
simultaneously:
Continuous Everything
Modern Infrastructure and Monitoring
DevSecOps
Cultural Transformations
DevOps in Government
“Tech Crawl" - where companies will invite you to a sneak peek of what it's 
like to work on DevOps in their organization.
 

All sessions are practitioner-led with a "no vendor pitch" policy strictly 
enforced.

 

You will need to register - https://www.alldaydevops.com/register

 

Watch parties – if you want to attend with others – not in every country 
unfortunately - https://www.alldaydevops.com/vp

 

Here is the schedule - https://www.alldaydevops.com/schedule - again, be sure 
to register!

 

 

-- 

Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman

mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: +1 (832) 264-2646

irc: mrhillsman

___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] COMING SOON! NEW COMMUNITY PORTAL!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

We are planning to update openstack.org/community with a new fancy
contributor portal.

We would love to get your feedback. As a new user:

   - What is the first thing you should do try OpenStack?
   - How can you build a proof of concept?
   - Reading documentation or watching relevant summit videos
   - Reporting bugs
   - Grabbing tools from osops
   - Participating in the Forum and SIGs
   - etc...



*Please respond to this thread or add feedback to the etherpad by Monday,
October 16th, 2017.*

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/contributor-portal-user-section

Mockups for reference:

*PNG* - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h7c2as0ko33e64y/AAANLpcFHQo
1fsIcZBNivtrma?dl=0
*Invision* - https://invis.io/CSDEZTBDJ#/252645774_Landing
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] COMING SOON! NEW COMMUNITY PORTAL!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

We are planning to update openstack.org/community with a new fancy
contributor portal.

We would love to get your feedback. As a new user:

   - What is the first thing you should do try OpenStack?
   - How can you build a proof of concept?
   - Reading documentation or watching relevant summit videos
   - Reporting bugs
   - Grabbing tools from osops
   - Participating in the Forum and SIGs
   - etc...



*Please respond to this thread or add feedback to the etherpad by Monday,
October 16th, 2017.*

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/contributor-portal-user-section

Mockups for reference:

*PNG* - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h7c2as0ko33e64y/AAANLpcFHQo
1fsIcZBNivtrma?dl=0
*Invision* - https://invis.io/CSDEZTBDJ#/252645774_Landing
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] COMING SOON! NEW COMMUNITY PORTAL!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

We are planning to update openstack.org/community with a new fancy
contributor portal.

We would love to get your feedback. As a new user:

   - What is the first thing you should do try OpenStack?
   - How can you build a proof of concept?
   - Reading documentation or watching relevant summit videos
   - Reporting bugs
   - Grabbing tools from osops
   - Participating in the Forum and SIGs
   - etc...



*Please respond to this thread or add feedback to the etherpad by Monday,
October 16th, 2017.*

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/contributor-portal-user-section

Mockups for reference:

*PNG* - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h7c2as0ko33e64y/AAANLpcFHQo
1fsIcZBNivtrma?dl=0
*Invision* - https://invis.io/CSDEZTBDJ#/252645774_Landing
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] UC Voting now Open!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

If you have not already received your email, please be sure to check your
SPAM folder. It has the following subject:
Poll: August 2017 OpenStack User Committee Election

And comes from Ed Leafe:
Edward Leafe (CIVS poll supervisor) 


-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack User Committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [all] Reminder: User Committee Nominations Now Open!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Just a friendly reminder that the UC elections are now open for candidates
to be peer- or self-nominated. In order to do so please send an email to
the user-commit...@lists.openstack.org mailing list and include the phrase
"UC Candidacy" in the subject line. More details can be found at the
following - https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-au
g2017.html#candidates

>
-- 
 Kind regards,
 OpenStack User Committee
 (Jon, Shilla, Shamail, Edgar, Melvin)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [all] Announcement: Public Cloud WG

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

We would like to announce the Public Cloud WG now being officially under
OpenStack governance! This group has been working very hard for some time
and have continued to progress through the consistency of its chairs and
members. We are looking forward to hearing great feedback and working
together with the Public Cloud WG to continue the success of OpenStack!

-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack User Committee
(Shilla, Shamail, Melvin, Jon, Edgar)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [all] Reminder: User Committee Nominations Start Today!

[Melvin Hillsman]

For our non-US community members, a gentle reminder.

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey everyone,
>
> Just a friendly reminder that the UC elections are now open for candidates
> to be peer- or self-nominated. In order to do so please send an email to
> the user-commit...@lists.openstack.org mailing list and include the
> phrase "UC Candidacy" in the subject line. More details can be found at the
> following - https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-
> aug2017.html#candidates
>
> --
> Kind regards,
>
> OpenStack User Committee
> (Jon, Shilla, Shamail, Edgar, Melvin)
>



-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack User Committee
(Jon, Shilla, Shamail, Edgar, Melvin)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [all] Reminder: User Committee Nominations Start Today!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Just a friendly reminder that the UC elections are now open for candidates
to be peer- or self-nominated. In order to do so please send an email to
the user-commit...@lists.openstack.org mailing list and include the phrase
"UC Candidacy" in the subject line. More details can be found at the
following -
https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2017.html#candidates

-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack User Committee
(Jon, Shilla, Shamail, Edgar, Melvin)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [all] Announcing openstack-sigs ML

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

Earlier this year we discussed areas we could collectively come together as
a community and be better. One area identified was getting unanswered
requirements simply put, answered[1]. After some small and larger
conversations the goal of adopting the SIG model, as touted by other
OpenSource communities like k8s and Fedora for example, was introduced at
the Forum[2].

With this goal in mind we understand that it is not the only single perfect
solution but it is one step in the right direction. Rather than wait for
ideas and implementation details to coalesce delaying the opportunity to
learn we decided to take to a couple actions:


   1. Start the openstack-sigs mailing list


   1. Propose creation of Meta SIG (
   http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-sigs/2017-July/00.html
   ) *be sure to read this*


An initial thread[3] surrounding the effectiveness and implementation of
SIGs had been started and folks should continue the conversation by using
the [meta] tag on the openstack-sigs mailing list. We look forward to
lively and above all practical and applicable discussions taking place
within SIGs which result in unanswered requirements being answered.

Also we would like to encourage current folks to use the [meta] tag in your
emails to the mailing list to discuss any successes, failures, advantages,
disadvantages, improvements, suggestions, etc.

[1]
http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/community-leadership-charts-course-openstack/
[2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-unanswered-requirements
[3] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/118723.html

-- 
Melvin Hillsman and Thierry Carrez
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] UC WG/Team Requirements

[Melvin Hillsman]

Totally agree with you Blair. I should have been more verbose in my
explanation of sending this. We have UC elections coming up, rather
important as everyone knows, being that the UC has gone from 3 appointed to
5 elected. We still have work to do re SIGs and have already taken a couple
actions which we are polishing up announcement regarding. Approving this
document resolves some current needs of the UC in particular as noted from
this week's meeting and does not mitigate the focus to move towards SIGs.

We have a method/process to discuss SIGs going forward and look for that to
be more organic, added to and taken from, over time as we understand SIG
successes and failures specific to our community so do not consider SIGs
for this for right now. Working Groups in the current context are
temporary, once they complete a specific task, they disband - think AUC
Recognition WG. Teams are permanent in that they have long term goals and
offer continued support of the long term goals of the UC - think Product
Team (personally I stopped used Product WG some time ago). Some folks might
ask why Product Working Group is not Product Team and one such reason is
this document not being ratified/approved yet. Unfortunately we are in
between a rock and a hard place with SIGs moving forward but we do not want
to neglect current/previous work in light of SIGs. Hopefully this offers
more understanding and if more information is needed please do ask.


On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Blair Bethwaite <blair.bethwa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for sharing Melvin,
>
> One major point here is that it's not clear how this proposal relates
> to the recent discussion around OpenStack SIGs. It's clear that more
> than a few of us are still struggling to understand intuitively why we
> are calling one thing a Working Group and another a Team, even when
> there are specific some requirements listed against them. Perhaps part
> of the problem is that the monikers themselves convey no meaning? I
> wonder if we could we do away with Team and instead have SIGs and
> Working Groups...?
>
> Cheers,
>
> On 13 July 2017 at 07:01, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > Please take time today to offer any additional
> comments/questions/concerns
> > to the following document -
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r3KwaG-
> SbvaKCuAE52XwPCF7cRGDrNRg6dUhPQWs0vU
> >
> > This document establishes the requirements for current and future UC
> > governed working groups and teams. We need to ensure we have this done
> > before upcoming UC election so your feedback is greatly appreciated.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > OpenStack User Committee
> >
> > (Edgar, Jon, Melvin, Shamail, Shilla)
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> ~Blairo
>



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] UC WG/Team Requirements

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please take time today to offer any additional comments/questions/concerns
to the following document -
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r3KwaG-SbvaKCuAE52XwPCF7cRGDrNRg6dUhPQWs0vU

This document establishes the requirements for current and future UC
governed working groups and teams. We need to ensure we have this done
before upcoming UC election so your feedback is greatly appreciated.


-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack User Committee

(Edgar, Jon, Melvin, Shamail, Shilla)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OpenStack Operators Midcycle

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Happy 4th of July Eve! We have the upcoming Operator Midcycle in Mexico
City, Mexico August 9-10th, 2017. Sign up via Eventbrite now*, space is
limited* -
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/mexico-city-openstack-operators-meetup-tickets-34989052197

We are taking session ideas and need your help generating them. Right now
we have Kubernetes, Containers, NFV, and few more -
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MEX-ops-meetup

-- 
Kind regards

OpenStack User Committee
(Edgar, Jon, Melvin, Shamail, Shilla)
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] [docs][all][ptl] Contributor Portal and Better New Contributor On-boarding

[Melvin Hillsman]

Got it! Looks great!

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Mike Perez <thin...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Melvin,
>
> Ah yes, I should’ve mentioned earlier that this is totally a POC.
> There are lots missing, don’t worry! :)
>
> —
> Mike Perez
>
> On June 29, 2017 at 13:47:14, Melvin Hillsman (mrhills...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > Did not have a chance to draft a message but thanks for ops mention.
> >
> > On Jun 29, 2017 3:02 PM, "Amy Marrich" wrote:
> >
> > > First off it looks really sleek and I love the look! A few thoughts
> though
> > > and I do realize it's just a mock up:
> > >
> > > 1) We have Sponsor just to pick one but don't have
> > > Operators/Administrators and their feedback is a major contribution so
> > > please don't leave them out.
> > > 2) I would list the contributor types in alphabetical order that way no
> > > group feels slighted, you can't help it if Use Cases are last it's just
> > > that they start with a U vs Code which is a C.
> > > 3) What if you would like to contribute in multiple ways?
> > >
> > > Resources are definitely still underdevelopment there but are they
> meant
> > > to be broad applicable to all resources with more specialized one's
> visible
> > > when you click on how you'd like to contribute?
> > >
> > > Amy (spotz)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello all,
> > >>
> > >> Wes has just took my ugly mock up of the contributor portal idea and
> > >> came up with this [1].
> > >>
> > >> Here’s what he said:
> > >>
> > >> "The idea is to help get potential contributors to the right place,
> > >> using the outline Mike put together. Rather than sending people to a
> > >> different page for each contribution type, users would be able to see
> > >> what options are available all on this page. We’d send them to any
> > >> necessary page(s) once they’ve gone through this quasi-wizard. Is this
> > >> along the lines of what you were thinking? page 2 shows the view once
> > >> you’ve clicked “Code” on page 1 (just in case that wasn’t super
> > >> obvious) Thanks!”
> > >>
> > >> What do you all think? This does change things a bit of instead of the
> > >> landing page being more obvious of a resource of links, it’s both for
> > >> new and current contributors. Current contributors would hopefully be
> > >> able to see the resource links below.
> > >>
> > >> Keep in mind that we will be working in the “Top 5 requested help” and
> > >> as suggested by Clark, an option of “I don’t know where I want to
> > >> start, but I want to help” kind of option. This would direct people to
> > >> resources such as Upstream University, mentor program, low hanging
> > >> fruit, that release priority idea I talked about earlier, etc.
> > >>
> > >> Personally I like it!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [1] - https://www.dropbox.com/s/3q172qwfkik1ysd/contributor-port
> > >> al.pdf?dl=0
> > >>
> > >> —
> > >> Mike Perez
> > >>
> > >> On June 27, 2017 at 13:48:36, Mike Perez (thin...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > >> > Hello all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Every month we have people asking on IRC or the dev mailing list
> having
> > >> interest in working
> > >> > on OpenStack, and sometimes they're given different answers from
> > >> people, or worse,
> > >> > no answer at all.
> > >> >
> > >> > Suggestion: lets work our efforts together to create some common
> > >> documentation so that
> > >> > all teams in OpenStack can benefit.
> > >> >
> > >> > First it’s important to note that we’re not just talking about code
> > >> projects here. OpenStack
> > >> > contributions come in many forms such as running meet ups,
> identifying
> > >> use cases (product
> > >> > working group), documentation, testing, etc. We want to make sure
> those
> > >> potential contributors
> > >> > feel welcomed too!
> > >> >
> > >> > What is common documentation? Things like setting up Git, the many
> > >> accounts you need
> > >> > to setup to contribute (

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] [docs][all][ptl] Contributor Portal and Better New Contributor On-boarding

[Melvin Hillsman]

+1

Did not have a chance to draft a message but thanks for ops mention.

On Jun 29, 2017 3:02 PM, "Amy Marrich"  wrote:

> First off it looks really sleek and I love the look! A few thoughts though
> and I do realize it's just a mock up:
>
> 1) We have Sponsor just to pick one but don't have
> Operators/Administrators and their feedback is a major contribution so
> please don't leave them out.
> 2) I would list the contributor types in alphabetical order that way no
> group feels slighted, you can't help it if Use Cases are last it's just
> that they start with a U vs Code which is a C.
> 3) What if you would like to contribute in multiple ways?
>
> Resources are definitely still underdevelopment there but are they meant
> to be broad applicable to all resources with more specialized one's visible
> when you click on how you'd like to contribute?
>
> Amy (spotz)
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Mike Perez  wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Wes has just took my ugly mock up of the contributor portal idea and
>> came up with this [1].
>>
>> Here’s what he said:
>>
>> "The idea is to help get potential contributors to the right place,
>> using the outline Mike put together. Rather than sending people to a
>> different page for each contribution type, users would be able to see
>> what options are available all on this page. We’d send them to any
>> necessary page(s) once they’ve gone through this quasi-wizard. Is this
>> along the lines of what you were thinking? page 2 shows the view once
>> you’ve clicked “Code” on page 1 (just in case that wasn’t super
>> obvious) Thanks!”
>>
>> What do you all think? This does change things a bit of instead of the
>> landing page being more obvious of a resource of links, it’s both for
>> new and current contributors. Current contributors would hopefully be
>> able to see the resource links below.
>>
>> Keep in mind that we will be working in the “Top 5 requested help” and
>> as suggested by Clark, an option of “I don’t know where I want to
>> start, but I want to help” kind of option. This would direct people to
>> resources such as Upstream University, mentor program, low hanging
>> fruit, that release priority idea I talked about earlier, etc.
>>
>> Personally I like it!
>>
>>
>> [1] - https://www.dropbox.com/s/3q172qwfkik1ysd/contributor-port
>> al.pdf?dl=0
>>
>> —
>> Mike Perez
>>
>> On June 27, 2017 at 13:48:36, Mike Perez (thin...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> > Hello all,
>> >
>> > Every month we have people asking on IRC or the dev mailing list having
>> interest in working
>> > on OpenStack, and sometimes they're given different answers from
>> people, or worse,
>> > no answer at all.
>> >
>> > Suggestion: lets work our efforts together to create some common
>> documentation so that
>> > all teams in OpenStack can benefit.
>> >
>> > First it’s important to note that we’re not just talking about code
>> projects here. OpenStack
>> > contributions come in many forms such as running meet ups, identifying
>> use cases (product
>> > working group), documentation, testing, etc. We want to make sure those
>> potential contributors
>> > feel welcomed too!
>> >
>> > What is common documentation? Things like setting up Git, the many
>> accounts you need
>> > to setup to contribute (gerrit, launchpad, OpenStack foundation
>> account). Not all
>> > teams will use some common documentation, but the point is one or more
>> projects will use
>> > them. Having the common documentation worked on by various projects
>> will better help
>> > prevent duplicated efforts, inconsistent documentation, and hopefully
>> just more
>> > accurate information.
>> >
>> > A team might use special tools to do their work. These can also be
>> integrated in this idea
>> > as well.
>> >
>> > Once we have common documentation we can have something like:
>> > 1. Choose your own adventure: I want to contribute by code
>> > 2. What service type are you interested in? (Database, Block storage,
>> compute)
>> > 3. Here’s step-by-step common documentation to setting up Git, IRC,
>> Mailing Lists,
>> > Accounts, etc.
>> > 4. A service type project might choose to also include additional
>> documentation in that
>> > flow for special tools, etc.
>> >
>> > Important things to note in this flow:
>> > * How do you want to contribute?
>> > * Here are **clear** names that identify the team. Not code names like
>> Cloud Kitty, Cinder,
>> > etc.
>> > * The documentation should really aim to not be daunting:
>> > * Someone should be able to glance at it and feel like they can finish
>> things in five minutes.
>> > Not be yet another tab left in their browser that they’ll eventually
>> forget about
>> > * No wall of text!
>> > * Use screen shots
>> > * Avoid covering every issue you could hit along the way.
>> >
>> > ## Examples of More Simple Documentation
>> > I worked on some documentation for the Upstream University preparation
>> that has received
>> > excellent feedback meet close 

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Turning TC/UC workgroups into OpenStack SIGs

[Melvin Hillsman]

 how many
> different work groups are there that care about scaling? So rather than
> have 5 work groups that all overlap on some level for a specific issue,
> create a SIG for that specific issue so the people involved can work on
> defining the specific problem and work to come up with a solution that can
> then be implemented by the upstream development teams, either within a
> single project or across projects depending on the issue. And once the
> specific issue is resolved, close down the SIG.


> Examples here would be things that fall under proposed community wide
> goals for a release, like running API services under wsgi, py3 support,
> moving policy rules into code, hierarchical quotas, RBAC "admin of admins"
> policy changes, etc. Have a SIG that is comprised of people with different
> roles (project managers, product managers, operators, developers, docs, QA)
> that are focused on solving that one specific issue and drive it, and then
> close it down once some completion criteria is met.
>
>
A SIG possibly should continue to exist for something like scaling, as it
will more than likely not have been created for a defined work dealing with
scaling but rather scaling itself which a number of work items would come
out of.

That still doesn't mean you're going to get the attendance you need from
> all parties. I don't know how you solve that one. People are going to work
> on what they are paid to work on.


Part of the resolution SIGs can assist with in getting folks to attend,
getting paid or not, are a number of outcomes from SIGs, well thought out
feature requests (PjMs), understanding of what should/should not/can/can
not be done (DEVs), why it makes sense to resolve one or more should/can
nots (OPs), resources to speed time to resolution (PrMs), single point of
discussion (ALL), etc, etc. Possibly when folks see that rather than
spending 100% of their resources on a work item that load can be shared and
there is a simple way to determine so by participating in a SIG that will
help as well.


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



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [all][tc][uc] Turning TC/UC workgroups into OpenStack SIGs

[Melvin Hillsman]

>> it's been reborn as a TC workgroup, led by a couple of devs, and is
>> lacking app user input. Artificial barriers discourage people to join.
>> Let's just call all of them SIGs.
>>
>> - the "Public Cloud WG" tries to cover an extremely important use case
>> for all of OpenStack (we all need successful OpenStack public clouds).
>> However, so far I've hardly seen a developer joining, because it's seen
>> as an Ops group just trying to make requirements emerge. I want the few
>> developers that OVH or CityCloud or other public clouds are ready to
>> throw upstream to use the rebranded "Public Cloud SIG" as a rally point,
>> to coordinate their actions. Because if they try to affect upstream
>> separately, they won't go far, and we badly need them involved.
>>
>> Yes, it's mostly a rebranding exercise, but perception matters.
>> Hope this clarifies,
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>>
>> 
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
>> e
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Shamail Tahir
> t: @ShamailXD
> tz: Eastern Time
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Turning TC/UC workgroups into OpenStack SIGs [all][uc]

[Melvin Hillsman]

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Shamail Tahir <itzsham...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In the past, governance has helped (on the UC WG side) to reduce
> overlaps/duplication in WGs chartered for similar objectives. I would like
> to understand how we will handle this (if at all) with the new SIG proposa?
> Also, do we have to replace WGs as a concept or could SIG augment them? One
> suggestion I have would be to keep projects on the TC side and WGs on the
> UC side and then allow for spin-up/spin-down of SIGs as needed for
> accomplishing specific goals/tasks (picture of a  diagram I created at the
> Forum[1]).
>
>
I believe we still have WGs that overlap for specific objectives - like
scalability - and having a Scalability SIG could be more efficient rather
than the objective existing in multiple WGs who still have to gather
resources to address the objective. Spin up/down can still happen though I
think of a SIG as something that while it would spin down at some point, it
may be quite some time before it does, depending on the special interest.


> The WGs could focus on defining key objectives for users of a shared group
> (market vertical like Enterprise or Scientific WG, horizontal function like
> PWG) and then SIGs could be created based on this list to accomplish the
> objective and spin-down. Similarly a project team could determine a need to
> gather additional data/requirements or need help with a certain task could
> also spin-up a SIG to accomplish it (e.g. updating an outdated docs set,
> discussion on a specific spec that needs to be more thoroughly crafted,
> etc.)
>
>
I think SIGs like Documentation, Public Cloud, Scalability, make sense
rather than being created to address a more specific objective. A WG could
spin off from a SIG but does not seem reasonable for it to be the other way
around since the idea behind a working group is to work on something
specific - AUC Recognition - and then those members fold back into 0 or 1
SIG. I could be off but I get the feeling that WGs can come together and
find commonality amongst each other within a SIG and get more
accomplished/quicker aggregating resources around what they already share
interest in.


> Finally, how will this change impact the ATC/AUC status of the SIG members
> for voting rights in the TC/UC elections?
>

Personally I think AUC could go to all members of the SIGs and ATC for
those meeting the criteria but this may be a conversation to have between
TC/UC where extra-ATC is provided as it does not seem fair, though fair may
be irrelevant or relative, for UC elections to be wholly subjected to all
SIG members and not TC elections.


>
> [1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_yCSDGnhIbzS3V1b1lpZGpIaHBmc29S
> aUdiYzJtX21BWkl3/
>
> Thanks,
> Shamail
>
> PS: I wish we had a single thread on this topic so discussions happening
> on the various MLs could be cross referenced.
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhills...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> One of the areas identified as a priority by the Board + TC + UC workshop
>> in March was the need to better close the feedback loop and make unanswered
>> requirements emerge. Part of the solution is to ensure that groups that
>> look at specific use cases, or specific problem spaces within OpenStack get
>> participation from a wide spectrum of roles, from pure operators of
>> OpenStack clouds, to upstream developers, product managers, researchers,
>> and every combination thereof. In the past year we reorganized the Design
>> Summit event, so that the design / planning / feedback gathering part of it
>> would be less dev- or ops-branded, to encourage participation of everyone
>> in a neutral ground, based on the topic being discussed. That was just a
>> first step.
>>
>> In OpenStack we have a number of "working groups", groups of people
>> interested in discussing a given use case, or addressing a given problem
>> space across all of OpenStack. Examples include the API working group, the
>> Deployment working group, the Public clouds working group, the Telco/NFV
>> working group, or the Scientific working group. However, for governance
>> reasons, those are currently set up either as a User Committee working
>> group[1], or a working group depending on the Technical Committee[2]. This
>> branding of working groups artificially discourages participation from one
>> side to the others group, for no specific reason. This needs to be fixed.
>>
>> We propose to take a page out of Kubernetes playbook and set up "SIGs"
>> (special interest groups), that would be primarily defined by their mission
>> (i.e. the use case / problem space the group wants to 

[Openstack-operators] Turning TC/UC workgroups into OpenStack SIGs [all][uc]

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hi everyone,

One of the areas identified as a priority by the Board + TC + UC workshop
in March was the need to better close the feedback loop and make unanswered
requirements emerge. Part of the solution is to ensure that groups that
look at specific use cases, or specific problem spaces within OpenStack get
participation from a wide spectrum of roles, from pure operators of
OpenStack clouds, to upstream developers, product managers, researchers,
and every combination thereof. In the past year we reorganized the Design
Summit event, so that the design / planning / feedback gathering part of it
would be less dev- or ops-branded, to encourage participation of everyone
in a neutral ground, based on the topic being discussed. That was just a
first step.

In OpenStack we have a number of "working groups", groups of people
interested in discussing a given use case, or addressing a given problem
space across all of OpenStack. Examples include the API working group, the
Deployment working group, the Public clouds working group, the Telco/NFV
working group, or the Scientific working group. However, for governance
reasons, those are currently set up either as a User Committee working
group[1], or a working group depending on the Technical Committee[2]. This
branding of working groups artificially discourages participation from one
side to the others group, for no specific reason. This needs to be fixed.

We propose to take a page out of Kubernetes playbook and set up "SIGs"
(special interest groups), that would be primarily defined by their mission
(i.e. the use case / problem space the group wants to collectively
address). Those SIGs would not be Ops SIGs or Dev SIGs, they would just be
OpenStack SIGs. While possible some groups will lean more towards an
operator or dev focus (based on their mission), it is important to
encourage everyone to join in early and often. SIGs could be very easily
set up, just by adding your group to a wiki page, defining the mission of
the group, a contact point and details on meetings (if the group has any).
No need for prior vetting by any governance body. The TC and UC would
likely still clean up dead SIGs from the list, to keep it relevant and
tidy. Since they are neither dev or ops, SIGs would not use the -dev or the
-operators lists: they would use a specific ML (openstack-sigs ?) to hold
their discussions without cross-posting, with appropriate subject tagging.

Not everything would become a SIG. Upstream project teams would remain the
same (although some of them, like Security, might turn into a SIG). Teams
under the UC that are purely operator-facing (like the Ops Tags Team or the
AUC recognition team) would likewise stay as UC subteams.

Comments, thoughts ?

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee#Working_Groups_and_Teams
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Upstream_Working_Groups

-- 
Melvin Hillsman & Thierry Carrez
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Meet-up Mexico City

[Melvin Hillsman]

Awesome!

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
wrote:

> All the credit for the local team. Gloria is doing a fantastic job.
>
> Edgar
>
> On 6/13/17, 6:41 PM, "Chris Morgan" <mihali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Fantastic. Great work, Sir!
>
> Chris
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jun 13, 2017, at 8:09 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > I have good news. The time has been finally confirmed to be from
> 10am to 6pm. We are good with the current Eventbrite. Let’s spread the word!
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.
> eventbrite.com_e_mexico-2Dcity-2Dopenstack-2Doperators-2Dmeetup-
> 2Dtickets-2D34989052197=DwIFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_
> KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_
> wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=xOaimSbHde91i8WhkWV3MHJOsXWtBv
> cIckOiseJiKvE=MP-3_-XT5e345N8CeYWxjYE6jYZXKzSVPLsAE9WGEHg=
> >
> > Edgar
> >
> > On 6/13/17, 9:02 AM, "Edgar Magana" <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> >We have a problem. Today during the Ops IRC meeting, I mentioned
> that the time for the sessions is from 10am to 6pm but I was wrong, the
> place does not open until 11am.  Yes, I know this is really bad.
> >The local team is trying to have the place at 10am. I will notify
> back a soon as we get a response.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Edgar
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap - claims in the scheduler (or conductor)

[Melvin Hillsman]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Matt Riedemann <mriede...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:55 PM
Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap - claims in the
scheduler (or conductor)
To: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org


The etherpad for this session is here [1]. The goal for this session was to
inform operators and get feedback on the plan for what we're doing with
moving claims from the computes to the control layer (scheduler or
conductor).

We mostly talked about retries, which also came up in the cells v2 session
that Dan Smith led [2] and will recap later.

Without getting into too many details, in the cells v2 session we came to a
compromise on build retries and said that we could pass hosts down to the
cell so that the cell-level conductor could retry if needed (even though we
expect doing claims at the top will fix the majority of reasons you'd have
a reschedule in the first place).

During the claims in the scheduler session, a new wrinkle came up which is
the hosts that the scheduler returns to the top-level conductor may be in
different cells. So if we have two cells, A and B, with hosts x and y in
cell A and host z in cell B, we can't send z to A for retries, or x or y to
B for retries. So we need some kind of post-filter/weigher filtering such
that hosts are grouped by cell and then they can be sent to the cells for
retries as necessary.

There was also some side discussion asking if we somehow regressed
pack-first strategies by using Placement in Ocata. John Garbutt and Dan
Smith have the context on this (I think) so I'm hoping they can clarify if
we really need to fix something in Ocata at this point, or is this more of
a case of closing a loop-hole?

We also spent a good chunk of the session talking about overhead
calculations for memory_mb and disk_gb which happens in the compute and on
a per-hypervisor basis. In the absence of automating ways to adjust for
overhead, our solution for now is operators can adjust reserved host
resource values (vcpus, memory, disk) via config options and be
conservative or aggressive as they see fit. Chris Dent and I also noted
that you can adjust those reserved values via the placement REST API but
they will be overridden by the config in a periodic task - which may be a
bug, if not at least a surprise to an operator.

We didn't really get into this during the forum session, but there are
different opinions within the nova dev team on how to do claims in the
controller services (conductor vs scheduler). Sylvain Bauza has a series
which uses the conductor service, and Ed Leafe has a series using the
scheduler. More on that in the mailing list [3].

Next steps are going to be weighing both options between Sylvain and Ed,
picking a path and moving forward, as we don't have a lot of time to sit on
this fence if we're going to get it done in Pike.

As a side request, it would be great if companies that have teams doing
performance and scale testing could help out and compare before (Ocata) and
after (Pike with claims in the controller) results, because we eventually
want to deprecate the caching scheduler but that currently outperforms the
filter scheduler at scale because of the retries involved when using the
filter scheduler, and which we expect doing claims at the top will fix.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-move-claims-from-
compute-to-scheduler
[2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-cellsv2-developer
-community-coordination
[3] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/116949.html

-- 

Thanks,

Matt

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



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap - instance/volume affinity for HPC

[Melvin Hillsman]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Matt Riedemann <mriede...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:53 PM
Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap -
instance/volume affinity for HPC
To: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org


The etherpad for this session is here [1]. This was about discussing ways
to achieve co-location or affinity for VMs and volumes for
high-performance, and was spurred by an older dev list discussion (linked
in the etherpad).

This quickly grew into side discussions and it became apparent that at a
high level we were talking about complicated solutions looking for a
problem. That is also touched on a bit after the session in the dev ML [2].

The base use case is a user wants their server instance and volume located
as close to each other as possible, ideally on the same compute host.

We talked about ways to model a sort of "distance" attribute between
resource providers in an aggregate relationship (in the placement sense of
'aggregate', not compute host aggregates in nova). This distance or
nearness idea led down a path for how you define distance in a cloud, i.e.
does 'near' mean the same host or rack or data center in a particular
cloud? How are these values defined - would they be custom per cloud and if
so, how is that discoverable/inter-operable for an end API user? It was
noted that flavors aren't inter-operable either really, at least not by
name. Jay Pipes has an older spec [3] about generic scheduling which could
replace server groups, so this could maybe fall into that.

When talking about this there are also private cloud biases, i.e. things
people are willing to tolerate or expose to their users because they are
running a private cloud. Those same things don't all work in a public
cloud, e.g. mapping availability zones one-to-one for cinder-volume and
nova-compute on the same host when you have hundreds of thousands of hosts.

Then there are other questions about if/how people have already solved this
using things like flavors with extra specs and host aggregates and the
AggregateInstanceExtraSpecsFilter, or setting [cinder]cross_az_attach=False
in nova.conf on certain hosts. For example, setup host aggregates with
nova-compute and cinder-volume running on the same host, define flavors
with extra specs that match the host aggregate metadata, and then charge
more for those flavors as your HPC type. Or, can we say, use Ironic?

It's clear that we don't have a good end-user story for this requirement,
and so I think next steps for this are going to involve working with the
public cloud work group [4] and/or product work group [5] (hopefully those
two groups could work together here) on defining the actual use cases and
what the end user experience looks like.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-compute-instance-
volume-affinity-hpc
[2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/116694.html
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/183837/
[4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudWorkingGroup
[5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ProductTeam

-- 

Thanks,

Matt

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



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap - cinder ephemeral storage

[Melvin Hillsman]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Matt Riedemann <mriede...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:24 PM
Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] Boston Forum session recap - cinder
ephemeral storage
To: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org


The etherpad for this session is here [1]. The goal for this session was
figuring out the use cases for using Cinder as instance ephemeral storage
and short/long-term solutions.

This really came down to a single use case, which is as an operator I want
to use Cinder for all of my storage needs, which means minimal local
compute disk is used for VMs.

We discussed several solutions to this problem which are detailed with
pros/cons in the etherpad. We arrived at two solutions, one is short-term
and one is long-term:

1. Short-term: provide a way to force automatic boot from volume in the API.

John Griffith had a POC for doing this with flavor extra specs which are
controlled by the admin and by default are not discoverable by the API
user. There are downsides to this, like the fact that the API user isn't
specifying BDMs but while their server is creating, they see a volume pop
up in Horizon which they didn't expect (which is for their root disk) and
since they don't want to be charged for it, they delete it - which makes
the server go into ERROR state eventually (and is not retried). This just
makes for a weird/bad user experience and it was unclear how to
microversion this in the API so it's discoverable, plus it couples two
complicated debt-ridden pieces of Nova code: flavor extra specs and block
device mappings. It is, however, fairly simple to implement.

2. Long-term: write an image backend driver which is a proxy to Cinder.
This would not require any changes to the API, it's all configurable
per-compute, it would remove the need for the in-tree RBD/ScaleIO/LVM image
backends, and open up support for all other Cinder volume drivers - plus
we'd allow passing through a volume type via flavor extra spec in this
case. This option, however, has no owner, and is dependent on working it
into an area of the code that is very complicated and high technical debt
right now (the libvirt imagebackend code). So while we all agreed we'd love
to have this, it's not even really on the horizon.

As a compromise on the short-term option, I suggested that we avoid using
flavor extra specs to embed auto-BFV and instead put a new attribute
directly on the flavor, e.g. is_volume_backed, or something like that. This
would be in a microversion which makes it discoverable. Operators control
the flavors so they can control which ones have this flag set, and could
tie those flavors to host aggregates for compute hosts where they want to
avoid local disk for ephemeral storage.

The next step from this session is going to be fleshing out this idea into
a spec which can be discussed for the Queens release, which would also
include details on the alternatives in the etherpad and the pros/cons for
each so we don't lose that information. Unless someone beats me to it, I
think I'm signed up for writing this spec.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-using-cinder-for-
nova-ephemeral-storage

-- 

Thanks,

Matt

-- 

Thanks,

Matt

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



-- 
-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Board Initiative: Strategy for Unanswered Requirements

[Melvin Hillsman]

Good morning everyone!

If you are at the Summit and available at 9:50am please take time to join
us in Room 104 at the Hynes Convention Center. Just a couple things to
remember:

Context:
http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/community-leadership-charts-course-openstack/

Etherpad:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-unanswered-requirements

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [Forum] Unanswered Requirements

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

I would like to take the opportunity to open the discussion up for feedback
from the community leading into the Boston Forum.

*Session Description*: Collaborate/communicate around user stories, gap
analysis, what fits in the current state of tech, prioritize what would
have the greatest impact in reducing pain for users. Ideally we would like
to discuss in this session successes and failures of the current state of
our feedback loop. We should be able to identify patterns that fit within a
larger system/process that we are able to iterate through as the way to get
user requirements implemented into code. [1]

Moving the conversation forward is the aim with the ultimate goal being the
first iteration of a plan that can be implemented, and one that gathers
data/insight consistently to make specific and relevant improvements.

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-forum-unanswered-requirements

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
mrhills...@gmail.com
mobile: (832) 264-2646

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ops Team Meeting 042417 Canceled

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Apologies for the late notice. Unless someone can facilitate the ops team
meeting we will have to cancel for today:

http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#OpenStack_OSOps_Team

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
OpenStack Engineer, Rackspace

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://rackspace.com

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Ops Meetups Team Meeting Reminder

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Just a reminder that the meetups team will be meeting today 4/11 at 1500UTC

Agenda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ops-meetups-team


https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1=100,1816670,2147714,4699066=100=2017-4-11=15-16
https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1=100,2643743,5391959,2950159=100=2017-4-11=15-16

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] about the R release name

[Melvin Hillsman]

This cracked me up! "Mountain Dew learned the hard way when 4 Chan took
control of a vote
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/4chan-mountain-dew_n_1773076.html>
to name a new flavor, and the joke was on Taylor Swift and VH1 when the
Internet chose a school for the deaf
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/taylor-swift-horace-mann-school-for-the-deaf-4chan-prank-contest_n_1932257.html>
as a concert location."

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Matt Joyce <m...@nycresistor.com> wrote:

> +2
>
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 04/10/2017 02:10 PM, Amrith Kumar wrote:
>>
>>> The naming is based on community input and there's good reason to
>>> believe that in this round of voting both of these values will get a low
>>> score.
>>>
>>> But, we could have a repeat of the Boaty McBoatface debacle 
>>>
>>
>> I would totally vote for OpenStack Boaty McBoatface. Maybe we can switch
>> from place names to names of the form "{foo}y Mc{foo}face" for all releases
>> after Z ...
>>
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/europe/boaty-mcboat
>>> face-what-you-get-when-you-let-the-internet-decide.html?_r=0
>>>
>>> -amrith
>>>
>>> --
>>> Amrith Kumar
>>> amrith.ku...@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Saverio Proto [mailto:ziopr...@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 3:02 PM
>>>> To: OpenStack Operators <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
>>>> Subject: [Openstack-operators] about the R release name
>>>>
>>>> Hello Ops,
>>>>
>>>> I got the mail about the Poll for OpenStack R Release Naming
>>>>
>>>> I am shocked that there are proposed names like Raspberry or Root !
>>>>
>>>> Think about troubleshooting and searching on google:
>>>>
>>>> Openstack Raspberry "string of log file"
>>>>
>>>> The Raspberry or Root words are anti-google words that will pollute the
>>>> search with a lot of results from other context domain 
>>>>
>>>> Please be smart when voting ! We need names that can identify easily the
>>>> releases when using search engines !!!
>>>>
>>>> thank you
>>>>
>>>> Saverio
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] UC Meeting 04/10/17 Cancelled

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Apologies for the late notice. We are cancelling the meeting today. We have
moved to a weekly cadence with meetings being subject to new agenda items
having to be proposed/added by the Friday before the meeting. In other
words, for UC meeting scheduled for 04/17/17 agenda items will need to be
proposed/added by this Friday 04/14/17

Thanks very much,

OpenStack UC
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder User Committee Meeting

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

User Committee will meet today in #openstack-meeting @ 1900UTC. If you have
any requests for agenda items you can reply to this email or message any of
the UC members via email as well as IRC - #openstack-uc

-- 
Kind regards,

OpenStack UC
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] OSOps Meetings for April

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Just a friendly reminder that OSOps meetings for April will happen on
Monday April 10th and April 24th at 1400UTC in #openstack-meeting-5

Please feel free to add to the agenda and invite 100 people :)

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/osops-meeting

You can catch up on previous meeting notes/logs by visiting
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/osops

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Boston Forum Submission Deadline!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Please take time to *submit your proposals *from the etherpad(s) or any
other place you have captured/brainstormed. This is  a friendly reminder
that all proposed Forum session leaders must submit their abstracts at:

http://forumtopics.openstack.org/

*before 11:59PM UTC on Sunday April 2nd!*

Regards,

TC/UC
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [openstack-dev] Project Navigator Updates - Feedback Request

[Melvin Hillsman]

For those interested.


-- Forwarded message --
From: Lauren Sell <lau...@openstack.org>
Date: Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:57 AM
Subject: [openstack-dev] Project Navigator Updates - Feedback Request
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>


Hi everyone,

We’ve been talking for some time about updating the project navigator, and
we have a draft ready to share for community feedback before we launch and
publicize it. One of the big goals coming out of the joint TC/UC/Board
meeting a few weeks ago[1] was to help better communicate ‘what is
openstack?’ and this is one step in that direction.

A few goals in mind for the redesign:
- Represent all official, user-facing projects and deployment services in
the navigator
- Better categorize the projects by function in a way that makes sense to
prospective users (this may evolve over time as we work on mapping the
OpenStack landscape)
- Help users understand which projects are mature and stable vs emerging
- Highlight popular project sets and sample configurations based on
different use cases to help users get started

For a bit of context, we’re working to give each OpenStack official project
a stronger platform as we think of OpenStack as a framework of composable
infrastructure services that can be used individually or together as a
powerful system. This includes the project mascots (so we in effect have
logos to promote each component separately), updates to the project
navigator, and bringing back the “project updates” track at the Summit to
give each PTL/core team a chance to provide an update on their project
roadmap (to be recorded and promoted in the project navigator among other
places!).

We want your feedback on the project navigator v2 before it launches.
Please take a look at the current version on the staging site and provide
feedback on this thread.

http://devbranch.openstack.org/software/project-navigator/

Please review the overall concept and the data and description for your
project specifically. The data is primarily pulled from TC tags[2] and Ops
tags[3]. You’ll notice some projects have more information available than
others for various reasons. That’s one reason we decided to downplay the
maturity metric for now and the data on some pages is hidden. If you think
your project is missing data, please check out the repositories and submit
changes or again respond to this thread.

Also know this will continue to evolve and we are open to feedback. As I
mentioned, a team that formed at the joint strategy session a few weeks ago
is tackling how we map OpenStack projects, which may be reflected in the
categories. And I suspect we’ll continue to build out additional tags and
better data sources to be incorporated.

Thanks for your feedback and help.

Best,
Lauren

[1] http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/community-leadership-charts-
course-openstack/
[2] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/
[3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Tags


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




-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Boston Forum Reminder

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

This is  a friendly reminder that all proposed Forum session leaders must
submit their abstracts at:

http://forumtopics.openstack.org/

*before 11:59PM UTC on Sunday April 2nd!*

Regards,

TC/UC
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Reminder -- Forum Topic Submission

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

This is  a friendly reminder that all proposed Forum session leaders must
submit their abstracts at:

http://forumtopics.openstack.org/

*before 11:59PM UTC on Sunday April 2nd!*

Regards,

TC/UC
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Boston Forum - Formal Submission Now Open!

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone!

We have made it to the next stage of the topic selection process for the
Forum in Boston.

Starting today, our submission tool is open for you to submit abstracts for
the most popular sessions that came out of your brainstorming. *Please note
that the etherpads are not being pulled into the submission tool and
discussion around which sessions to submit are encouraged.*

We are asking all session leaders to submit their abstracts at:

http://forumtopics.openstack.org/

*before 11:59PM UTC on Sunday April 2nd!*

We are looking for a good mix of project-specific, cross-project or
strategic/whole-of-community discussions, and *sessions that emphasize
collaboration between users and developers are most welcome!*

We assume that anything submitted to the system has achieved a good amount
of discussion and consensus that it is a worthwhile topic. After
submissions close, a team of representatives from the User Committee, the
Technical Committee, and Foundation staff will take the sessions proposed
by the community and fill out the schedule.

You can expect the draft schedule to be released on April 10th.

Further details about the Forum can be found at: https://wiki.openstack.org/
wiki/Forum

Regards,

OpenStack User Committee
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: [Openstack] nova-network -> neutron migration docs and stories?

[Melvin Hillsman]

--
Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center
mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
http://osic.org

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch>
> Date: March 18, 2017 at 09:49:18 GMT+1
> To: Andrew Bogott <andrewbog...@gmail.com>
> Cc: "openst...@lists.openstack.org" <openst...@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] nova-network -> neutron migration docs and stories?
> 
> Ricardo from CERN gave a talk in Barcelona about our experiences. 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54wp1yzC-d8
>  
> eBay was one of the first to migrate - 
> http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/ebay-in-production-migration-from-nova-network-to-neutron/
>  
> Tim
>  
> From: joe <j...@topjian.net>
> Date: Friday, 17 March 2017 at 22:52
> To: Andrew Bogott <andrewbog...@gmail.com>
> Cc: "openst...@lists.openstack.org" <openst...@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] nova-network -> neutron migration docs and stories?
>  
> Hi Andrew,
>  
> NeCTAR published a suite of scripts for doing a nova-network to neutron 
> migration: https://github.com/NeCTAR-RC/novanet2neutron
>  
> IIRC, another organization reported success with these scripts a few months 
> ago on the openstack-operators list.
>  
> I'm currently doing some trial runs and all looks good. I had to make some 
> slight modifications to account for IPv6 and floating IPs, but the scripts 
> are very simple and readable, so it was easy to do. I'll probably post those 
> modifications to Github in the next week or two.
>  
> We'll be doing the actual migration in May.
>  
> Hope that helps,
> Joe
>  
>  
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Andrew Bogott <abog...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Googling for nova-network migration advice gets me a lot of hits but many 
> are fragmentary and/or incomplete[1][2]  I know that lots of people have gone 
> through this process, though, and that there are probably as many different 
> solutions as there are migration stories.
> 
> So:  If you have done this migration, please send me links! Blog posts, 
> docpages that you found useful, whatever you have to offer.  We have lots of 
> ideas about how to move forward, but it's always nice to not repeat other 
> people's mistakes.  We're running Liberty with flat dhcp and floating IPs.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Andrew
> 
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/MigrationFromNovaNetwork/HowTo#How_to_test_migration_process
>  ' TODO - fill in the migration process script here'
> 
> [2] 
> https://www.slideshare.net/julienlim/openstack-nova-network-to-neutron-migration-survey-results
>  Slide 4: 'Develop tools to facilitate migration.'  Did they?
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>  
> ___
> Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to : openst...@lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Boston Forum Brainstorming

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone!

Please be aware of the following dates if you have not heard already. I
know we mentioned this extensively at the Midcycle this week and yep, here
we are again! Take note that the deadline for the brainstorming phase is
fast approaching.

March 20: end of brainstorming phase, opening of formal submission tool
EOD April 2: deadline for topic submission
April 10: publication of the schedule

Take just a few moments to drop your thoughts in the etherpad(s) found at:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Boston2017

In particular:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BOS-UC-brainstorming

If you have any questions, reply back to this thread or reach out to any of
us.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Milan Ops Midcycle

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

I want to send a big thank you to everyone who participated in the Midcycle!

To our sponsors we appreciate you making a venue, food, and all the other 
logistics that went into making the event a success.

Thank you to every moderator who dealt with me nagging them about their 
sessions and getting some actionable items out of their discussions; I have one 
more request coming :)

Additionally thank you to all the companies who sent their folks to the 
Midcycle:

Enter, Bloomberg, Nuage Networks, Intel, Cloudbase, Switch, and OpenStack

And to you folks who attended in person and remotely, we are very greatful that 
we sold every ticket, ate lots of Italian food, the courtyard side chats, 
networking, collaboration, and so much more. Be sure to communicate the value 
you got out of attending but most importantly let us work together outside of 
the Midcycle to accomplish what we can.

Remember OSOps meeting in #openstack-meeting-5 on 03/27/17 at 1400 UTC

--
Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center
mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
http://osic.org

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] OpenStack Operators Milan - Neutron Session

[Melvin Hillsman]

Agree with you on this Edgar and it deserves further discussion. We discussed 
this a week ago or so now amongst Ops Meetup Team and again, I think we should 
discuss further; I am not saying what is right or wrong.

--
Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center
mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
http://osic.org

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 12:33, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Chris,
>  
> I totally understand your position. Believe me, without vendors support we 
> wouldn’t even have an Ops Meetup as successful as we have currently.
> My email was an open question to all Operators about the format of the 
> sessions. It was clear that the company that you work for was requested an 
> updated and not the other way around.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Christoph Andreas Torlinsky <christ...@nuagenetworks.net>
> Date: Monday, March 13, 2017 at 10:30 AM
> To: Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> Cc: "randy.perry...@dell.com" <randy.perry...@dell.com>, 
> "OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org" 
> <OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OpenStack Operators Milan - Neutron Session
>  
> Hey Edgar, i'm going because we run our NuageX Dev/Test on OpenStack, so we 
> are also 'operators', eating our own product
> and contributing back to OpenStack with anything we hit, and I'm also an avid 
> user of OpenStack myself,
> hope that clears it up a bit, I'm not going to Vendor pitch or do marketing, 
> for that we have other venues.
>  
> We are also one of the sponsors as it happens along with Bloomberg, Intel and 
> others, 
> which is also a nice thing, to contribute into the community.
>  
> all the best,
>  
> c
> 
> 
> Christoph Andreas Torlinski
>  
> christ...@nuagenetworks.net
>  
> On 13 March 2017 at 17:21, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com> wrote:
> WOW! Something has changed from previous Ops Meet-ups. I remember clearly 
> that we (Operators), wanted to have a free-from-vendors environment and it 
> seems that now we want them to come and provide updates on their offerings.
> I think vendors have plenty opportunities to show their features and demos, 
> for instance the Summits and OpenStack Days around the world.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Edgar
>  
> From: Christoph Andreas Torlinsky <christ...@nuagenetworks.net>
> Date: Monday, March 13, 2017 at 10:11 AM
> To: "randy.perry...@dell.com" <randy.perry...@dell.com>
> Cc: "OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org" 
> <OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] OpenStack Operators Milan - Neutron Session
>  
> I'll be there from Nuage Networks, as far as I know.
>  
>  
> 
> 
> Christoph Andreas Torlinski
>  
> christ...@nuagenetworks.net
>  
> On 9 March 2017 at 13:36, <randy.perry...@dell.com> wrote:
> Here is the etherpad for the Neutron Session in Milan
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-neutron
>  
> Please add to it anything you would like to cover. 
>  
> Also will anyone from SDN Vendors be there?  Please come and provide a 5 
> minute update to your offering.
>  
> Thank You
>  
> Randy Perryman
> Technical Staff, Cloud Architect
> Certified OpenStack Administrator
> 
> Dell EMC | OpenSource Solutions Group
> office + 01 603 249 7710
> mobile +01 603 321 5611
> email randy.perry...@dell.com
> http://www.dell.com/cloud
>  
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>  
> Confidentiality Notice | This e-mail message, including any attachments, is 
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or 
> proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, 
> immediately contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the 
> original message.
>  
>  
> 
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
> 
>  
>  
> ___
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [osops] Milan Ops Midcycle - OSOps Session

[Melvin Hillsman]

Here's the etherpad for the OSOps session at the Ops Midcycle:

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-osops

I have added some points to consider during the session and would love for
you to add new topics and/or comments on the existing ones; even if you are
not attending.

Also a reminder to participate in the session brainstorming for the Forum!
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Boston2017

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [user-committee] [openstack-operators] [openstack-community] [osops] Team Bi-Weekly Meeting Summary

[Melvin Hillsman]

Apologies for the delay,

We had a great reboot meeting! The previous and upcoming agendas can be
found at the following:

http://etherpad.openstack.org/p/osops-meeting

*The next meeting is 3/13 1400UTC in #openstack-meeting-5*

We focused on quite a few things and are looking to start hashing out some
actionable work around the discussions in the coming days, below is just a
snapshot of some items:


   - Establish structure/pluggability around the "when approved" repo (tool
   creators should only have to worry about the logic of what the tool will do
   - common tasks imported via libs)
   - Work towards stable/release branches and tags approach (starting with
   stable/newton being ocata was just released not long ago)
   - Standardizing in general (an example is every tool requires a README
   so at a glance user is aware of pertinent information about the tool)
   - Documentation assistance (it is not about writing but reviewing what
   is currently in place and filing a bug at a minimum, creating a patch is
   always encouraged)
   - Reviewing and contributing user stories -
   https://github.com/openstack/openstack-user-stories (this is significant
   as users have to back the stories for work to be potentially allocated; the
   more +1s/reviews a story gets, more likely it is seen as valuable work)

*We hope to see you in the next meeting, invite a friend or two or 10 and
come with your opinions, grievances, ideas, and dreams!*

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Upcoming Ops Midcycle

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

If you have been getting previous emails then you are aware the midcycle is
quickly approaching; March 15th and 16th!

*T**here is still time offer feedback for existing sessions*. Also remember
that *you do not have to be in attendance to have a voice here*. We welcome
you to participate in shaping the dialogue even though you may not
physically attend.

Below you will find all the etherpads for each session and there are no
hard and fast rules so feel free to throw as many ideas in there as you can
think of. Please also *encourage other Operators, End-Users, Application
Developers, Developers, everyone you know who can offer some value to
participate*.

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-openstack-on-containers
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-containers-on-openstack
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-logging-and-monitoring
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-ceph-and-cephfs
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-baremetal
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-upgrades-patches-packaging
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-config-management
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-keystone-and-authentication
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-inventory-and-fleet-management
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-live-migration
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-security
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-scaling-and-tuning
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-deployment-methods
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-rabbitmq-pitfalls-ha
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-dbaas-with-trove
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-do-not-do
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-osops
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-fault-injection-and-remediation
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-migration-onboarding-end-user-experience
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-ux-horizon-cli
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-cellsv2
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-neutron
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-cinder-rolling-upgrade
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-overview-of-auc
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-uc
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-capacity-management
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-manila
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-telco-nfv

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] [openstack-operators] [osops] Meeting

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Just a friendly reminder about OSOps meeting on today at 1400UTC in
#openstack-operators

Please be sure to review the etherpad - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/
osops-meeting - and add agenda items or comment on existing ones.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Fwd: Operators Mid-cycle Moderator

[Melvin Hillsman]

Hey everyone,

Thank you all for signing up to be moderators at the upcoming Operator
Mid-cycle. I am sending this not only to you but to the ML at large in
hopes that we get additional volunteers.

*OpenStack Community:*

Please sign up if you are interested in moderating using the following
etherpad - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-meetup

And * there is still time to suggest additional sessions and +1 or -1
existing sessions*. Also remember that *you do not have to be in attendance
to have a voice here*. We welcome you to participate in shaping the agenda
even though you may not physically attend.

*Current Volunteer Moderators:*

If you have not already, be sure to take a look at the moderator's guide -
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Operations/Meetups#Moderators_Guide

What I hope to accomplish with this email is that you 1) respond back
confirming that you will or will not attend the mid-cycle if you have not
already confirmed, and 2) the agenda is just about done and some names have
been added to sessions already. If you do not feel comfortable with a
session you have been assigned, go ahead and change. If you see an open
session and would like to moderate it, feel free to add your name.

I created an etherpad for each session on the agenda and dropped in a
template on each one - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-moderator-
template - please be sure to start working out the details of the session.

*I encourage each moderator to use this thread to ask any questions and
reach out to the community at large and projects related to the session you
are moderating.*

I am looking forward to seeing all of you at the mid-cycle and thank you so
much for your time.

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

[Openstack-operators] Freenode Security Notification

[Melvin Hillsman]

Noticed this message this morning from Freenode so in case you missed it:

"christel (christel@freenode/staff/exherbo.christel): [Global Notice] Hi
all, Cloudflare has announced that a bug may have caused disclosure of
data, sent via CF, to third parties, further info can be found at
https://blog.cloudflare.com/ | freenode uses CF for CDN, while we have not
received any reports indicating that we are affected, we urge webchat users
in particular to consider changing their passwords! Thank you."

-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

Re: [Openstack-operators] [User-committee] User Committee IRC Meeting - Monday Feb 13th

[Melvin Hillsman]

Thanks for the reminder Leong! Edgar I provided comments as requested; they
are on the document itself.

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
wrote:

> UC Members,
>
>
>
> Do not forget to prepare your feedback on the Product WG proposal for the
> Forum. We need to internally approve it before we move it to the next phase.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> *From: *"Yih Leong, Sun." <yihle...@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 9:34 AM
> *To: *Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> *Cc: *"user-commit...@lists.openstack.org" <user-committee@lists.
> openstack.org>, OpenStack Operators <openstack-operators@lists.
> openstack.org>, "openst...@lists.openstack.org" <
> openst...@lists.openstack.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [User-committee] User Committee IRC Meeting - Monday Feb
> 13th
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> As discussed in previous UC meeting, can I also ask UC members to review
> the proposal [1] on how Product WG can help to facilitate the Forum?
>
>
>
> [1] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1jTlO4UdNjc5cOKboeCNhLDEdttazW
> WlDgNxxulUrPNg/edit
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_presentation_d_1jTlO4UdNjc5cOKboeCNhLDEdttazWWlDgNxxulUrPNg_edit=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=cBERgAwwqBoi9v4fccj2CnXDrO9Sz3J8osE2y4wnK3s=jMpCSWIFPU4eXi_qaz_kYxYRBDaeJyQ4e6LbtrNvqwI=>
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Leong.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.mag...@workday.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear UC Community,
>
>
>
> Our next UC IRC meeting is scheduled for this Monday Feb 27th at 1900 UTC
> in (freenode) #openstack-meeting.
>
>
>
> Agenda:
>
> - Welcome UC elected members: Shamail and Melvin
>
> - Review previous action items
>
> - Board + TC + UC meeting in Boston (March 8-9, 2017)
>
> - Open agenda
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Edgar
>
>
> ___
> User-committee mailing list
> user-commit...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_user-2Dcommittee=DwMFaQ=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ=cBERgAwwqBoi9v4fccj2CnXDrO9Sz3J8osE2y4wnK3s=dwG3LgXzdve7SnE-sUr_Es_o42-edKrJe3jhJ4R60ks=>
>
>
>



-- 
Kind regards,

Melvin Hillsman
Ops Technical Lead
OpenStack Innovation Center

mrhills...@gmail.com
phone: (210) 312-1267
mobile: (210) 413-1659
http://osic.org

Learner | Ideation | Belief | Responsibility | Command
___
OpenStack-operators mailing list
OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators