Re: [Crowbar] crowbar coommunity branch work coordination

[J_T_Williams]

All,

The branch for "roxy" development work has been cut and is open for business.

Any outstanding pebbles pull request should be reviewed and merged into pebbles 
and cherry-picked into "roxy" with the same pebbles comments.  To avoid 
conflicts, preserve the ordering of merges.

The next community call, there will be a discussion of changing the grizzly 
bits to Havana bits.

-John



From: Kanevsky, Arkady
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 4:44 PM
To: CE-Cloud; CE-Crowbar; crowbar
Subject: crowbar coommunity branch work coordination

No merges any more.
We are preparing to  cut Roxy now!!!

[cid:image001.jpg@01CEBBA6.2DC8C260]


Arkady Kanevsky, Ph.D.

Director of SW Development

Enterprise Solution Group

+1 512 723 5264 | arkady_kanev...@dell.com



<>___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Roxy transition to Havana bits

[J_T_Williams]

I will be canceling these pull request and submitting new ones as Openstack has 
released Havana.  I need to change the
files to reflect the new openstack "havana/stable" location.



From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Kanevsky, Arkady
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 12:57 PM
To: crowbar
Subject: [Crowbar] Roxy transition to Havana bits

Team,
Yesterday JT submitted an initial bunch of commits to use havana bits for roxy 
(see below).
We know that builds and initial node deployment works fine.
Any objections to merging these in and then sorting out any breakage in 
barclamps?

It is good to see that several fixes on top of these are already being 
submitted:
https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-keystone/pull/125

Thanks,
Arkady

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-nova
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 240 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-nova/pull/240)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-tempest
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 52 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-tempest/pull/52)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-swift
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 143 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-swift/pull/143)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-quantum
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 141 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-quantum/pull/141)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-nova_dashboard
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 108 created 
(https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-nova_dashboard/pull/108)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-glance
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 139 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-glance/pull/139)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-ceilometer
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 34 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceilometer/pull/34)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-keystone
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 124 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-keystone/pull/124)

To https://github.com/jtwill98/barclamp-cinder
* [new branch]  release/roxy/master -> 
pull-req-release-roxy-master-3bb4c6cc22881de90084cba6ee8a6f1664dffb8c
Pull request 96 created (https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-cinder/pull/96)



[cid:image001.jpg@01CECB58.39BBC290]


Arkady Kanevsky, Ph.D.

Director of SW Development

Enterprise Solution Group

+1 512 723 5264 | arkady_kanev...@dell.com



<>___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Roxy transition to Havana bits

[J_T_Williams]

All,

Since the quantum was renamed to neutron and it no longer exists in openstack 
organization repo,
I have created a new barclamp called barclamp-neutron and pushed the 
barclamp-quantum repo to
it.

For Roxy, we'll need to start using barclamp-neutron and make all necessary 
adjustments for the new name.

-JT
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential

I created the repo barclamp-ceph under crowbar and gave collaborators 
permissions to the crowbar/suse and crowbar/dell groups.

Let me know if you have further issues.

-John



-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Michal Jura
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:13 AM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

Hi,

We moved official branch https://github.com/SUSE-Cloud/barclamp-ceph
release/inktank/master to release/pebbles/master and we added also branch for 
roxy release/roxy/master.

I would like to create pull request to https://github.com/crowbar repository 
and start code review, but there is basic problem 
https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceph does not exist. How can I create this 
pull-request?

I added smoketest too.

Thank you for answer and little bit help,

Have a nice work :)


On Mon, 2013-10-28 at 16:56 +0100, Michal Jura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So commits :)
>
> For glance
> https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-glance/pull/133
>
> For cinder
> https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-cinder/pull/87
>
> For nova
> https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-nova/pull/248
>
> All this pull-requests I was testing dozen times in my devel
> environment with different scenarios.
>
> Next step to do is:
> - write documentation
> - prepare smoketests
> - test it with ubuntu
> - resolve new potential bugs
> - testing, testing and polishing
>
> On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 17:17 -0500, arkady_kanev...@dell.com wrote:
> > Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
> > This is great news.
> > Michal,
> > Are all the commits needed for it to work for glance, cinder and nova has 
> > been merged?
> > I recall that several glance ones were still outstanding. How do we test 
> > them?
> >
> > Question on ceph barclamp: Does that include documentation, smoketest, 
> > integration with other crowbar components, like nagios and ganglia?

> > Thanks,
> > Arkady
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Michal Jura
> > Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 9:40 AM
> > To: crowbar
> > Subject: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I resend previous email which was bounced by mailman. Sorry for it.
> > ---
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have some small announcement for you guys, based on official Ceph Inktakt 
> > cookbook I've developed new barclamp-ceph.

> >
> > You can find it under this link:
> > https://github.com/SUSE-Cloud/barclamp-ceph/tree/release/inktank/mas
> > ter
> >
> > I spent on this barclamp-ceph couple last weeks and finally it is working 
> > and stable. I resolved many problems there for example:

> >
> >   - Adding osd mount points to /etc/fstab
> >   - Resolve bug with running osds without mon on this same node
> >   - Adding disk allocation/selection mode
> >   - Improve cinder and glance integration, resolving problem when cinder 
> > and glance run on different nodes
> >   - Integration with glance and cinder
> >   - Forcing ceph osd to use storage network
> >   - Adding ceph clients for cinder and glance
> >   - Update validation process
> >   - Adding auto claiming disks from pool
> >   - Changing locking method for setting crush map
> >
> > The most important thing is, that with this ceph barclamp and with 
> > integration patches for glance, cinder and nova which we provide already to 
> > crowbar repositories, we have full integration with Ceph, which we tested 
> > and it is working really awesome.

> >
> > So, please let ask and let me know what do you think about upstreaming new 
> > ceph barclamp to crowbar project.
> >
> > I was testing this barclamp-ceph with Ceph "Bobtail" in version 0.56.6.
> >
> > Have a nice weekend and I'm waiting for your feedback,
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michal Jura
> > Software Engineer SUSE Linux Enterprise Applications SUSE LINUX
> > Products GmbH
> > GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG
> > Nürnberg)
> > Maxfeldstraße 5
> > 90409 Nürnberg
> > Germany
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Crowbar mailing list
> > Crowbar@dell.com
> > https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
> > For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
>
>
>


--
Michal Jura
Software Engineer SUSE Linux Enterprise Applications SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG
Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstraße 5
90409 Nürnberg
Germany


___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Today, we re-pulled the barclamp-ceph from the suse repo and forcibly pushed it 
into crowbar so that the refs match.  You should be able to proceed.
Also, we need to know what version of ceph is this barclamp based on so that we 
can update the crowbar.yml file for our build.



-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:33 AM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

Victor Lowther (victor_lowt...@dell.com) wrote:
> Michal,
>
> What is broken for you?  I pushed the CB2.0 Ceph stuff I have been
> working on into the mater branch of the ceph repository, is that what
> is causing problems for you?

No, it's that https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceph was not created by 
forking from another repository in the existing github network for 
barclamp-ceph.  It was created from scratch, so now there are two separate 
networks within github for barclamp-ceph, and it is not possible for pull 
requests or comparisons to span those two islands.

Since the previous network is far bigger, the newer one should be deleted and 
the repos recreated by forking.  This should also help eliminate a superfluous 
root within the commit tree.

___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Can someone answer what version of ceph this barclamp is based on?   I need to 
update the crowbar.yml to support Ubuntu 12.04.
Since Victor made the changes yesterday, has Michal tried submitting his 
changes?   Based on the collaborators' list the SUSE team has push & Pull 
permissions and mjura is a part of the team, so he should be able to pull and 
push to the barclamp.  Has he tried adding crowbar as a remote to his 
barclamp-ceph repo?
What is the problem (error messages) that describe the issue?  We might run 
into it again and it would be helpful to know the issue/resolution.
-John

-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 4:50 PM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

Sorry, but that won't help.  It's not a question of making the refs match 
(that's a git-level issue); it's a question of telling github that it's part of 
the same repo network.  Please compare the two following pages:

  https://github.com/SUSE-Cloud/barclamp-ceph/network/members
  https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceph/network/members

Until these show the same list, the problem is still unresolved.
And AFAIK, the only way to fix this is to remove the repositories in the 
smaller network and re-fork them from one of the repos in the larger network 
(or to rename one of the repos in the larger network and then fork back to its 
original name).

j_t_willi...@dell.com (j_t_willi...@dell.com) wrote:
> Today, we re-pulled the barclamp-ceph from the suse repo and forcibly pushed 
> it into crowbar so that the refs match.  You should be able to proceed.

> Also, we need to know what version of ceph is this barclamp based on so that 
> we can update the crowbar.yml file for our build.

>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:33 AM
> To: crowbar
> Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement
>
> Victor Lowther (victor_lowt...@dell.com) wrote:
> > Michal,
> >
> > What is broken for you?  I pushed the CB2.0 Ceph stuff I have been
> > working on into the mater branch of the ceph repository, is that
> > what is causing problems for you?
>
> No, it's that https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceph was not created by 
> forking from another repository in the existing github network for 
> barclamp-ceph.  It was created from scratch, so now there are two separate 
> networks within github for barclamp-ceph, and it is not possible for pull 
> requests or comparisons to span those two islands.

>
> Since the previous network is far bigger, the newer one should be deleted and 
> the repos recreated by forking.  This should also help eliminate a 
> superfluous root within the commit tree.

>
> ___
> Crowbar mailing list
> Crowbar@dell.com
> https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
> For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

> ___
> Crowbar mailing list
> Crowbar@dell.com
> https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
> For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
I was not aware of the issue with github.  Michal explain the issue and you did 
not.
Now that we understand the issue, we have forked and corrected the situation.

-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 10:03 AM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement

We already fully understand the problem and know exactly what the resolution is 
- I have described it in detail directly below.  If you visit the two links I 
gave and re-read what I wrote, it should become very obvious to you too (and if 
not, please let me know which bit isn't clear, so I can clarify).

Once again, this is NOT a git-related issue, or even a github ACL issue.  It's 
an issue with the way github repo networks are built.

j_t_willi...@dell.com (j_t_willi...@dell.com) wrote:
> Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
> Can someone answer what version of ceph this barclamp is based on?   I need 
> to update the crowbar.yml to support Ubuntu 12.04.

> Since Victor made the changes yesterday, has Michal tried submitting his 
> changes?   Based on the collaborators' list the SUSE team has push & Pull 
> permissions and mjura is a part of the team, so he should be able to pull and 
> push to the barclamp.  Has he tried adding crowbar as a remote to his 
> barclamp-ceph repo?

> What is the problem (error messages) that describe the issue?  We might run 
> into it again and it would be helpful to know the issue/resolution.

> -John
>
> -Original Message-
> From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 4:50 PM
> To: crowbar
> Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Barclamp-ceph announcement
>
> Sorry, but that won't help.  It's not a question of making the refs match 
> (that's a git-level issue); it's a question of telling github that it's part 
> of the same repo network.  Please compare the two following pages:

>
>   https://github.com/SUSE-Cloud/barclamp-ceph/network/members
>   https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-ceph/network/members
>
> Until these show the same list, the problem is still unresolved.
> And AFAIK, the only way to fix this is to remove the repositories in the 
> smaller network and re-fork them from one of the repos in the larger network 
> (or to rename one of the repos in the larger network and then fork back to 
> its original name).

___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
All,
While we're in favor of cleaning this up, there are many folks out of the 
office who haven't been able to look at which branches we need to preserve.
I need to talk with them about the branch history in order to know what we can 
safely delete.   Until this happens, which will most likely be early January, do
not delete any branches.   Additionally,  please indicate here specifically 
what branches for what repositories you would like to see deleted.   I will try
my best with to coordinate the discussions and get consensus on this topic.
-John


-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Sascha Peilicke
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 8:12 AM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

On Wednesday 04 December 2013 12:32:58 Adam Spiers wrote:
> Comments inline ...
>
> Sascha Peilicke (speili...@suse.com) wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > here's a slightly edited per repository list of branches merged into
> > their master branch. All of those are behind master. In other words,
> > those are fully merged branches waiting to be cleaned up. So if
> > nobody objects, I'd like to drop those later this day.
>
> I'm a big fan of cleanup, but I think we should wait another day or
> two at least, to give our colleagues in the US some time to think it over.

Sure thing.

>
> > 
> > Playing the same game against release/roxy/master produces slightly
> > different results. It mainly digs up old release branches that are
> > only behind (i.e. there was never ever something committed to them).
> > Let's take swift for example (already removed the ones that will
> > also appear in the merged-in-> master list further down below):
> >   remotes/crowbar/feature/grizzly/master
> >   remotes/crowbar/release/betty/master
> >   remotes/crowbar/release/fred/master
> >   remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.3/master
> >   remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.4/master
> >
> > So the question here is do we want to keep those old /
> > never-modified release branches or are tags actually more
> > appropriate? My take is kill whatever we can and add tags instead.
> > This has the nice side-effect that github auto- generates releases
> > for each tags (and thus a downloadable source tarball). This way old
> > releases are more accessible, should anyone ever wanted to use
> > those. But I may be missing things, so please speak up which branches 
> > really matter.
> > 
>
> I think it's a question of support.  If we know for sure that *noone*
> will *ever* need to modify $OLD_RELEASE again or even build an ISO
> from it, then I think it's OK to convert it from a branch to a tag,
> with the goal of shrinking the currently long list of branches.
> However, even needing to still build ISOs from old releases would
> probably prevent this branch->tag conversion, because ./dev depends on
> the branches in order to build the ISOs.  *Maybe* if the tag had an
> identical name to the old branch it was replacing, it could still
> work.  But I doubt anyone tested that yet (and Victor might be able to
> immediately think of reasons why that wouldn't work, e.g. ./dev tool
> calling "git branch" directly).

Totally forgot about the ./dev tool :-) So let's wait what Victor and the 
others say.

>
> > Repo: ApacheHadoop
> >
> >   remotes/crowbar/feature/cb20_devguide/master
>
> I think features can and should be removed *iff* they are fully merged
> in *all* repos.
>
> >   remotes/crowbar/release/rails3anddb/master
>
> I'm not sure why the rails3anddb branches had the "release/" prefix.
> Pretty sure they can be removed.
>
> >   remotes/crowbar/andi-node-alloc-change
> >   remotes/crowbar/perf-imp
>
> This kind of stuff can almost certainly go iff it's merged.
>
> >   remotes/crowbar/pull-req/cloudedge/485
>
> AFAIK that shouldn't be there.  I'm guessing accidental leakage due to
> use of ./dev followed by a misguided git push?
>
> >   remotes/crowbar/vlowther-barclamp-pkg-metadata
> >   remotes/crowbar/vlowther-gemrc-hotfix
>
> Obviously stuff with someone's name on shouldn't be deleted until
> they've approved :-)  But in general, best practice is probably to
> avoid polluting the main repo with personal branches - that stuff
> should stay in our personal forks.  (And as we saw recently, I'm just
> as guilty of breaking that guideline as anyone else ;-)

--
With kind regards,
Sascha Peilicke
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] opencrowbar tools/build_sledgehammer.sh

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
For what it’s worth … it ran fine for me, on an ESX 5.5  Ubuntu 12.04 VM inside 
our lab in Austin.


From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Judd Maltin
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 11:07 AM
To: Lowther, Victor
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] opencrowbar tools/build_sledgehammer.sh

More than a little flakey - it hasn't worked once, and I've tried it >10 times.
Set imgcreate --debug --verbose
It shows no errors, just a whole bunch of
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
Retrieving 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/Packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm
 ...OK
which seems to be DAMN LIES.

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:09 AM, 
mailto:victor_lowt...@dell.com>> wrote:
The imgcreate tools handle that.  Too bad they can be a little flaky.

From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Judd Maltin
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 5:33 PM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] opencrowbar tools/build_sledgehammer.sh

tools/build_sledgehammer.sh still failing:

judd@ocbdev1:~/opencrowbar/core$ uname -a
Linux ocbdev1 3.8.0-29-generic #42~precise1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Aug 14 16:19:23 UTC 
2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

judd@ocbdev1:~/opencrowbar/core$ cat /etc/issue
Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS \n \l

.el6_1.1.noarch.rpm ...OK
warning: libgcc-4.4.7-4.el6.x86_64: Header V3 RSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 
c105b9de: NOKEY
  Installing: libgcc   # [  1/296]
  Installing: setup# [  2/296]
  Installing: filesystem   # [  3/296]
  Installing: basesystem   # [  4/296]
  Installing: kernel-firmware  # [  5/296]
  Installing: dhcp-common  # [  6/296]
  Installing: kernel-headers   # [  7/296]
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/yum-cli/callback.py", line 124, in callback
fd = os.open(rpmloc, os.O_RDONLY)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 
'/var/tmp/imgcreate-kN4x7k/install_root/var/cache/yum/a-base/packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm'
error: python callback > failed, aborting!
judd@ocbdev1:~/opencrowbar/core$

I can't find where the imgcreate directory would be created..

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Judd Maltin 
mailto:j...@newgoliath.com>>>
 wrote:
Linux judd-m6600 3.11.0-14-generic #21-Ubuntu SMP Tue Nov 12 17:04:55 UTC 2013 
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Judd Maltin 
mailto:j...@newgoliath.com>>>
 wrote:
WAT?

warning: libgcc-4.4.7-4.el6.x86_64: Header V3 RSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 
c105b9de: NOKEY
  Installing: libgcc   # [  1/296]
  Installing: setup# [  2/296]
  Installing: filesystem   # [  3/296]
  Installing: basesystem   # [  4/296]
  Installing: kernel-firmware  # [  5/296]
  Installing: dhcp-common  # [  6/296]
  Installing: kernel-headers   # [  7/296]
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/yum-cli/callback.py", line 124, in callback
fd = os.open(rpmloc, os.O_RDONLY)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 
'/var/tmp/imgcreate-_XxAMK/install_root/var/cache/yum/a-base/packages/mailcap-2.1.31-2.el6.noarch.rpm'
error: python callback > failed, aborting!


--
Judd Maltin
T: 917-882-1270>
F: 501-694-7809>
what could possibly go wrong?




--
Judd Maltin
T: 917-882-1270>
F: 501-694-7809>
what could possibly go wrong?




--
Judd Maltin
T: 917-882-1270
F: 501-694-7809
what could possibly go wrong?



--
Judd Maltin
T: 917-882-1270
F: 501-694-7809
what could possibly go wrong?

___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
Fo

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
I concur with Adam that we need a list of branches you wish to remove.   The 
hadoop branches 2.3 & 2.4 are relatively new and should not be deleted.

-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Adam Spiers
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:06 AM
To: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

Please can you post a full list of the branches you intend to delete, to ensure 
there is no confusion over the expected impact.  I think it would also be wise 
to give everyone in all time zones a minimum of 24 hours to respond before 
taking action.

Thomas Boerger (tboer...@suse.de) wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> as nobody else said something i would like to start removing old
> branches tomorrow! So it's your last chance to say something if you
> would like to get a copy of specific old branches. I will create tags
> for all the older release branches except roxy, stoney and hydrogen.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>   Thomas Boerger
>
> On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 02:11:50 PM Sascha Peilicke wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 December 2013 12:32:58 Adam Spiers wrote:
> > > Comments inline ...
> > >
> > > Sascha Peilicke (speili...@suse.com) wrote:
> > > > Hi there,
> > > >
> > > > here's a slightly edited per repository list of branches merged
> > > > into their master branch. All of those are behind master. In
> > > > other words, those are fully merged branches waiting to be
> > > > cleaned up. So if nobody objects, I'd like to drop those later
> > > > this day.
> > >
> > > I'm a big fan of cleanup, but I think we should wait another day
> > > or two at least, to give our colleagues in the US some time to think it 
> > > over.
> >
> > Sure thing.
> >
> > > > 
> > > > Playing the same game against release/roxy/master produces
> > > > slightly different results. It mainly digs up old release
> > > > branches that are only behind (i.e. there was never ever
> > > > something committed to them). Let's take swift for example
> > > > (already removed the ones that will also appear in the
> > > > merged-in->
> > > >
> > > > master list further down below):
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/feature/grizzly/master
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/release/betty/master
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/release/fred/master
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.3/master
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.4/master
> > > >
> > > > So the question here is do we want to keep those old /
> > > > never-modified release branches or are tags actually more
> > > > appropriate? My take is kill whatever we can and add tags
> > > > instead. This has the nice side-effect that github auto-
> > > > generates releases for each tags (and thus a downloadable source
> > > > tarball). This way old releases are more accessible, should
> > > > anyone ever wanted to use those. But I may be missing things, so
> > > > please speak up which branches really matter.
> > > > 
> > >
> > > I think it's a question of support.  If we know for sure that
> > > *noone* will *ever* need to modify $OLD_RELEASE again or even
> > > build an ISO from it, then I think it's OK to convert it from a
> > > branch to a tag, with the goal of shrinking the currently long list of 
> > > branches.
> > > However, even needing to still build ISOs from old releases would
> > > probably prevent this branch->tag conversion, because ./dev
> > > depends on the branches in order to build the ISOs.  *Maybe* if
> > > the tag had an identical name to the old branch it was replacing,
> > > it could still work.  But I doubt anyone tested that yet (and
> > > Victor might be able to immediately think of reasons why that
> > > wouldn't work, e.g. ./dev tool calling "git branch" directly).
> >
> > Totally forgot about the ./dev tool :-) So let's wait what Victor
> > and the others say.
> >
> > > > Repo: ApacheHadoop
> > > >
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/feature/cb20_devguide/master
> > >
> > > I think features can and should be removed *iff* they are fully
> > > merged in *all* repos.
> > >
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/release/rails3anddb/master
> > >
> > > I'm not sure why the rails3anddb branches had the "release/" prefix.
> > > Pretty sure they can be removed.
> > >
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/andi-node-alloc-change
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/perf-imp
> > >
> > > This kind of stuff can almost certainly go iff it's merged.
> > >
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/pull-req/cloudedge/485
> > >
> > > AFAIK that shouldn't be there.  I'm guessing accidental leakage
> > > due to use of ./dev followed by a misguided git push?
> > >
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/vlowther-barclamp-pkg-metadata
> > > >   remotes/crowbar/vlowther-gemrc-hotfix
> > >
> > > Obviously stuff with someone's name on shouldn't be deleted until
> > > they've approved :-)  But in general, best practice is probably to
> > > avoid polluting the main repo with personal branches - that stuff
> > > should stay in our personal forks.  (And as we saw recently, I'm
> > > just as guilty of breaking tha

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Thomas,
Give me another day to get a response from Dell's internal development team 
before taking any actions.
I have sent out an internal email detail the actions you wish to take but need 
a day to receive and correlate the email responses.
-John


-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Thomas Boerger
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32 PM
To: Thomas Boerger
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

Reminder: I want to start tagging and removing the mentioned branches tomorrow.
Quoting Thomas Boerger :

> I have created a Gist with all branches of all barclamps. There you
> can see what i think we should do with all these branches.
>
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/tboerger/c959c41134cf39c5f409/raw/d
> 59b2d250b6fbd323747ef4fe6843326e8edfc0e/gistfile1.txt
>
> I want to start with it on 19th March if nobody say something
> important on that.
>
>
> Thomas
>
> On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:35:15 AM Thomas Boerger wrote:
>> Guys, are you serious? we started this thread multiple months ago and
>> nobody really cared about it. And now we need to create again
>> multiple lists for repositories you don't work with anymore?
>>
>> And even if some of the old release branches need a bugfix you can
>> easily create branch out of the tag again.
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 09:05:28 AM j_t_willi...@dell.com wrote:
>> > Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
>> > I concur with Adam that we need a list of branches you wish to remove.
>> > The hadoop branches 2.3 & 2.4 are relatively new and should not be
>> > deleted.
>
> --
> Thomas Boerger 
> Research & Development
>
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany HRB
> 16746 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer


___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential


From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Williams, J T
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 10:46 AM
To: tboer...@suse.de; aspi...@suse.com
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".


Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Thomas,
Give me another day to get a response from Dell's internal development team 
before taking any actions.
I have sent out an internal email detail the actions you wish to take but need 
a day to receive and correlate the email responses.
-John


-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Thomas Boerger
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32 PM
To: Thomas Boerger
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

Reminder: I want to start tagging and removing the mentioned branches tomorrow.
Quoting Thomas Boerger mailto:tboer...@suse.de>>:

> I have created a Gist with all branches of all barclamps. There you
> can see what i think we should do with all these branches.
>
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/tboerger/c959c41134cf39c5f409/raw/d
> 59b2d250b6fbd323747ef4fe6843326e8edfc0e/gistfile1.txt
>
> I want to start with it on 19th March if nobody say something
> important on that.
>
>
> Thomas
>
> On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:35:15 AM Thomas Boerger wrote:
>> Guys, are you serious? we started this thread multiple months ago and
>> nobody really cared about it. And now we need to create again
>> multiple lists for repositories you don't work with anymore?
>>
>> And even if some of the old release branches need a bugfix you can
>> easily create branch out of the tag again.
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 09:05:28 AM 
>> j_t_willi...@dell.com wrote:
>> > Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
>> > I concur with Adam that we need a list of branches you wish to remove.
>> > The hadoop branches 2.3 & 2.4 are relatively new and should not be
>> > deleted.
>
> --
> Thomas Boerger mailto:tboer...@suse.de>>
> Research & Development
>
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany HRB
> 16746 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer


___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential

Thomas,
I have received word from our development teams.  Here is the view our 
leadership team asserted that we need to address  to ensure that we can quickly 
respond and support deployments in the field.
We should not be taking chances with our code trees unless

1)  There is a significant benefit to doing this

2)  We understand exactly what is going to occur and what it's 
repercussions are

3)  It is tested and validated that we are capable of recreating our 
releases.


Outside of clearing up community confusion, I see no significant benefit to 
doing this.  And even though we know what is going to occur and it's 
repercussion, we don't have time to invest in testing and validating that we 
can quickly recreate our releases.
Therefore, based on their concerns, we do not want any changes made at this 
time to fred, pebbles, hadoop* or the ApacheHadoop repo.

· Do not delete pebbles and fred - they are earlier versions of Hadoop.

· Do not delete anything with a hadoop- prefix - These are locked 
version of in-field code.

· Do not delete the ApacheHadoop repo - it is a meta barclamp with 
referenced dependencies and the build will break if you do.

For our assurances, you will be tagging the branch head prior to any branch 
deletion.  Is this correct?

-John


From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Williams, J T
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 10:46 AM
To: tboer...@suse.de; 
aspi...@suse.com
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".


Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Thomas,
Give me another day to get a response from Dell's internal development team 
before taking any actions.
I have sent out an internal email detail the actions you wish to take but need 
a day to receive and correlate the email responses.
-John


-Original Message-
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Thomas Boerger
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32 PM
To: Thomas Boerger
Cc: crowbar
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

Reminder: I want to start tagging and removing the mentioned branches tomorrow.
Quoting Thomas Boerger mailto:tboer...@suse.de>>:

> I have created a Gist with all branches of all barclamps. There you
> can see what i think we should do with all these branches.
>
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/tboerger/c959c41134cf39c5f409/raw/d
> 59b2d250b6fbd323747ef4fe6843326e8edfc0e/gistfile1.txt
>
> I want to start with it on 19th March if nobody say something
> important on that.
>
>
> Thomas
>
> On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:35:15 AM Thomas Boerger wrote:
>> Guys, are you serious? we started this thread multiple months ago and
>> nobody really cared about it. And now we need to create again
>> multiple lists for repositories you don't work with anymore?
>>
>> And even if some of the old release branches need a bugfix you can
>> easily create branch out of the tag again.
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 09:05:28 AM 
>> j_t_willi...@dell.com wrote:
>> > Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
>> > I concur with Adam that we need a list of branches you wish to remove.
>> > The hadoop branches 2.3 & 2.4 are relatively new and should not be
>> > deleted.
>
> --
> Thomas Boerger mailto:tboer...@suse.de>>
> Research & Development
>
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany HRB
> 16746 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer


___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/

Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

[J_T_Williams]

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
I am not arguing the point that anything will be lost.  I agree that with the 
tags, nothing will be
lost.

I am only voicing the concerns of the team who uses the branches that I 
mentioned as "not to delete"
on a regular basis for supporting their hadoop customers on different releases. 
 In our view, the benefit to
the team to leave the branches in place for quick customer support of their 
different hadoop releases has
more benefit than the arguments posed here.  Basically the branches listed have 
become maintenance
(sustaining) branches for several team members.  While they look to be dead, I 
was assured that the team
works on these branches and thus they requested that they not to be deleted.

Outside of the previously listed branches, all other actions listed in the 
spreadsheet please feel free to move forward on.



-Original Message-
From: J. Daniel Schmidt [mailto:j...@suse.de]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 9:23 AM
To: crowbar
Cc: Williams, J T; tboer...@suse.de; aspi...@suse.com
Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Removing branches fully merged into "master".

Just a short reply on behalf of Thomas:

On Friday 21 March 2014 08:43:57 j_t_willi...@dell.com wrote:
> 3)  It is tested and validated that we are capable of recreating our
> releases.

You can recreate any branch at any time. Nothing will be lost.


> · Do not delete pebbles and fred - they are earlier versions of Hadoop.
>
> · Do not delete anything with a hadoop- prefix - These are locked version of
>   in-field code.
>
> · Do not delete the ApacheHadoop repo - it is a meta barclamp with
>   referenced dependencies and the build will break if you do.

Nothing will be deleted at all.
Branches that are dead or unused will be tagged and the branch will be removed.

Note:
In git a branch is a reference to a commit. Same for tags.
The difference: A branch is moving (updated with each commit, thus tracking
work-in-progress) and a tag is static.

No repo, commit or line of code will be deleted.
Just some branches are switched to tags.

And if you need to work on such a tagged tree again in the future, you can 
recreate the branch anytime to indicate that there is work going on in this 
tree.


> For our assurances, you will be tagging the branch head prior to any
> branch deletion.  Is this correct?

That is what all this is about. Its about to create tags.


Ciao,
   Daniel

--
J. Daniel Schmidt  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Development   Maxfeldstr. 5
HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)  D-90409 Nürnberg
GF:  Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer
___
Crowbar mailing list
Crowbar@dell.com
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar
For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/