[openstack-dev] [RFC] Kilo release cycle schedule proposal

Hi everyone, Rather than waste a design summit session about it, I propose we review the proposed Kilo release cycle schedule on the mailing-list. See attached PDF for a picture of the proposal. The hard date the proposal is built around is the next ("L") Design Summit week: May 18-22. That pushe

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] To slide or not to slide? OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour...

Hi, I think that it was very informative and useful. I have forwarded it to a number of new people starting to work on OpenStack and who were wondering how to use mockŠ So two birds with one stone. Thanks! Gary On 9/22/14, 7:27 PM, "Jay Pipes" wrote: >Hi all, > >OK, so we had our inaugural OpenS

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

On 09/22/2014 09:25 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Gordon Sim wrote: > >> On 09/22/2014 03:40 PM, Geoff O'Callaghan wrote: >>> That being said I'm not sure why a well constructed zaqar with an rpc >>> interface couldn't meet the requirements of oslo.messsaging and muc

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] libvirt boot parameters

? 2014?09?22? 17:52, Chen CH Ji ??: whether following variables fit for your purpose? guess you want to override the value through boot command? cfg.IntOpt("reboot_timeout", default=0, help="Automatically hard reboot an instance if it has been " "stuck in

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Joe Gordon's message of 2014-09-22 19:04:03 -0700: > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: > > > > > On 22/09/14 17:06, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter > wrote: > > >>

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] PTL Candidacy

Hello all, My name is Mike Perez, and I would like to be your next PTL for the OpenStack block storage project Cinder. I've been involved with the OpenStack community since October 2010. I'm a senior developer for Datera, which contributes to Linux Bcache and the Linux-IO SCSI Target (LIO) in the

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

Excerpts from Geoff O'Callaghan's message of 2014-09-22 17:30:47 -0700: > On 23/09/2014 1:59 AM, "Clint Byrum" wrote: > > > > Geoff, do you expect all of our users to write all of their messaging > > code in Python? > > > > oslo.messaging is a _python_ library. > > > > Zaqar is a service with a RE

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Convergence: Backing up template instead of stack

Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2014-09-22 20:15:43 -0700: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Anant Patil wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > One of the steps in the direction of convergence is to enable Heat > > engine to handle concurrent stack operations. The main convergence spec > > talks abou

[openstack-dev] Research on software architecture in real systems

Hi, My name is Izabela Melo and I would like to invite the members of this group to participate in my Master's dissertation's research in Computer Science. One of the goals of this research is to understand how the industry uses the concept of software architecture in real projects. Besides this,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Some ideas for micro-version implementation

? 2014?09?22? 22:47, Anne Gentle ??: On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:29 AM, Kenichi Oomichi mailto:oomi...@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp>> wrote: Hi Alex, Thank you for doing this. > -Original Message- > From: Alex Xu [mailto:x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com

[openstack-dev] [gantt] Scheduler sub-group meeting - Agend 9/23

1) Forklift status 2) Opens -- Don Dugger "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale Ph: 303/443-3786 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Question regarding Stack updates and templates

Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2014-09-22 20:31:46 -0700: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Anant Patil wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > In convergence, we discuss about having concurrent updates to a stack. I > > wanted to know if it is safe to assume that the an update will be a > > super se

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Question regarding Stack updates and templates

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Anant Patil wrote: > Hi, > > In convergence, we discuss about having concurrent updates to a stack. I > wanted to know if it is safe to assume that the an update will be a > super set of it's previous updates. Understanding this is critical to > arrive at implemen

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL

Thanks for your fantastic leadership!! 2014-09-23 10:54 GMT+08:00 Adam Young : > On 09/22/2014 10:47 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > > Dearest stackers and [key]stoners, > > With the PTL candidacies officially open for Kilo, I'm going to take the > opportunity to announce that I won't be running ag

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] REST API style guide (Re: [Nova] Some ideas for micro-version implementation)

On 2014年09月23日 08:00, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: # I changed the title for getting opinions from many projects. 2014-09-22 23:47 GMT+09:00 Anne Gentle : -Original Message- From: Alex Xu [mailto:x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 3:40 PM To: OpenStack Development Mail

Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] Convergence: Backing up template instead of stack

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Anant Patil wrote: > Hi, > > One of the steps in the direction of convergence is to enable Heat > engine to handle concurrent stack operations. The main convergence spec > talks about it. Resource versioning would be needed to handle concurrent > stack operations.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

Excerpts from Joe Gordon's message of 2014-09-22 19:04:03 -0700: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: > > > On 22/09/14 17:06, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter wrote: > >> > >> On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: > >>> > >>> On 09/19/201

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL

On 09/22/2014 10:47 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote: Dearest stackers and [key]stoners, With the PTL candidacies officially open for Kilo, I'm going to take the opportunity to announce that I won't be running again for the position. I thoroughly enjoyed my time as PTL during Havana, Icehouse and Jun

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Some ideas for micro-version implementation

On 2014年09月23日 04:27, Brant Knudson wrote: On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Alex Xu > wrote: Close to Kilo, it is time to think about what's next for nova API. In Kilo, we will continue develop the important feature micro-version. In previous v

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: > >> On 22/09/14 17:06, Joe Gordon wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter wrote: >>> >>> On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: On 09/19/2014 09:13 PM, Zane

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 22/09/14 17:06, Joe Gordon wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter wrote: >> >> On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: >>> >>> On 09/19/2014 09:13 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: SQS offers very, very limited guarantees,

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Set WIP for stale patches?

On Fri 19 Sep 2014 09:25:10 AM PDT, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > Here we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think core reviewers > hiding behind an automated process so that they don't have to > confront contributors about stalled/inadequate changes is inherently > less friendly. Clearly you feel that

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] To slide or not to slide? OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour...

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:27:40PM -0400, Jay Pipes wrote: > OK, so we had our inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour last Friday. Thanks > to Sean and Dan for putting up with my rambling about unittest and mock > stuff. And thanks to one of my pugs, Winnie, for, according to Shrews, > "looking l

[openstack-dev] Preparing for 2014.1.3 -- branches freeze September 25th

Hi All- We'll be freezing the stable/icehouse branches for integrated projects this Thursday September 25th in preparation for the 2014.1.3 stable release on Thursday October 2nd. You can view the current queue of proposed patches on gerrit [1]. I'd like to request all interested parties review

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On 22/09/14 17:06, Joe Gordon wrote: On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter wrote: On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: On 09/19/2014 09:13 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: SQS offers very, very limited guarantees, and it's clear that the reason for that is to make it massively, massively scal

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

On 23/09/2014 1:59 AM, "Clint Byrum" wrote: > > Geoff, do you expect all of our users to write all of their messaging > code in Python? > > oslo.messaging is a _python_ library. > > Zaqar is a service with a REST API -- accessible to any application. No I do not. I am suggesting thaf a well des

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Devananda van der Veen > wrote: > >> One of the primary effects of integration, as far as the release >> process is concerned, is being allowed to co-gate with other >> integrated projects, and having those pr

[openstack-dev] [all] REST API style guide (Re: [Nova] Some ideas for micro-version implementation)

# I changed the title for getting opinions from many projects. 2014-09-22 23:47 GMT+09:00 Anne Gentle : >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: Alex Xu [mailto:x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] >> > Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 3:40 PM >> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List >> > Subject: [op

Re: [openstack-dev] Reverting recent refactorings of RBD support for config drives

I think we should leave LVM out for now -- I am not sure it makes sense to put a tens of megabyte file into its own LV. I'll fix the cleanup thing today. Michael On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Solly Ross wrote: > Overall, this looks good. > > Your alternate implementation misses LVM support, a

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Deprecating localfs?

Hi. I know we've been talking about deprecating nova.virt.disk.vfs.localfs for a long time, in favour of wanting people to use libguestfs instead. However, I can't immediately find any written documentation for when we said we'd do that thing. Additionally, this came to my attention because Ubunt

Re: [openstack-dev] Group-Based Policy Understanding and Queries

Thanks for your interest in GBP, responses inline. On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Sachi Gupta wrote: > Hi All, > > Request you all to provide inputs on below understanding: > > Openstack: Group-based policy is a blueprint for Juno-3 release of > Openstack. It will extend OpenStack Networking w

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On 23 September 2014 10:32, Dean Troyer wrote: > tl;dr: we're not broken, but under stress...changing (outside) expectations > requires changing the expression of the model...while it's called a 'stack' > maybe it's multiple tiered stacks. MultiStack! ... > > This is one reason for multiple laye

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

tl;dr: we're not broken, but under stress...changing (outside) expectations requires changing the expression of the model...while it's called a 'stack' maybe it's multiple tiered stacks. MultiStack! On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > The point of integration is to add the

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On 19 September 2014 22:29, Thierry Carrez wrote: ... > current Heat team is not really interested in maintaining them. What's > the point of being under the same program then ? And TripleO is not the > only way to deploy OpenStack, but its mere existence (and name) > prevented other flowers to bl

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Sep 22, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Tim Bell wrote: >> >>> >>> On 22 Sep 2014, at 20:53, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wro

[openstack-dev] [oslo] juno retrospective notes

We started a retrospective for Oslo during our meeting last week. I promised to summarize the notes and start a thread here on the mailing list to make discussion easier. See [1] for the rough notes. Please follow up here, especially if you have any thoughts on things we can improve during kilo.

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > >> >> On 22 Sep 2014, at 20:53, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Monty Taylor wrote: > I've recently been thinking a lot about

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: > >> On 09/19/2014 09:13 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: >> >>> SQS offers very, very limited guarantees, and it's clear that the reason >>> for that is to make it massively, massively scalable in the way that >>> e

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

On Sep 22, 2014, at 1:20 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 09/21/2014 10:57 PM, Nader Lahouti wrote: >> Thanks Kevin for bring it up in the ML, I was looking for a guideline or >> any document to clarify issues on this subject. >> >> I was told, even using keystone API in neutron is not permitted. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Some ideas for micro-version implementation

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Alex Xu wrote: > Close to Kilo, it is time to think about what's next for nova API. In > Kilo, we > will continue develop the important feature micro-version. > > In previous v2 on v3 propose, it's include some implementations can be > used for micro-version. > (h

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

On 23 September 2014 08:09, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 09/22/2014 03:36 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> I'm going to push on this a bit further. Mocking is fine in many >> cases, but it encodes dependencies from within your objects into the >> test suite: e.g. that X will call Y and then Z - and if thats

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

On 09/22/2014 03:36 PM, Robert Collins wrote: On 23 September 2014 03:58, Matthew Booth wrote: If you missed the inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour, it's here: http://youtu.be/jCWtLoSEfmw . I think this is a fantastic idea and big thanks to Sean, Jay and Dan for doing this. I liked the form

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

I would have to agree, fakes certainly have there benefits. IMHO, sometimes when you are testing a complex set of interactions you don't want to have to mock the full set of interactions when you just want to determine if the end result worked or did not work. For example, lets say I have a work

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] Nominating Aaron Rosen for congress-core

Congrats Aaron ~sean > On Sep 22, 2014, at 12:49 PM, Peter Balland wrote: > > Aaron has now been added to the congress-core group in gerrit. > > Cheers, > > Peter > > From: Rajdeep Dua > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Date: Thursday, September

Re: [openstack-dev] [Congress] Nominating Aaron Rosen for congress-core

Aaron has now been added to the congress-core group in gerrit. Cheers, Peter From: Rajdeep Dua mailto:rajdeep@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Date: Thursday, September 18, 2014 at 1:26 AM To: "Op

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:43 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 09/22/2014 10:58 AM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: >>> On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 10:32 -0700, Armando M. wrote: What about: https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/te

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 09/22/2014 10:58 AM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 10:32 -0700, Armando M. wrote: >>> What about: >>> >>> https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/test-requirements.txt#L12 >> >> Pulling in ordereddict doesn't do

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

On 23 September 2014 03:58, Matthew Booth wrote: > If you missed the inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour, it's here: > http://youtu.be/jCWtLoSEfmw . I think this is a fantastic idea and big > thanks to Sean, Jay and Dan for doing this. I liked the format, the > informal style and the content. U

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Tim Bell wrote: > > On 22 Sep 2014, at 20:53, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> >> On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> >>> Monty Taylor wrote: I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote a blog post which Jim Blai

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [nova] requirements freeze exception for websockify

FYI, we roughly do semantic versioning right-shifted by one -- for a release 0.X.Y, incrementing X is supposed to be backwards-incompatible, while incrementing Y is supposed to be backwards-compatible [1]. Thus, you can safely say anything less than 0.7 should work fine for Nova. Best Regards,

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

On Sep 22, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Gordon Sim wrote: > On 09/22/2014 03:40 PM, Geoff O'Callaghan wrote: >> That being said I'm not sure why a well constructed zaqar with an rpc >> interface couldn't meet the requirements of oslo.messsaging and much more. > > What Zaqar is today and what it might bec

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [nova] requirements freeze exception for websockify

On 09/22/2014 02:58 PM, Solly Ross wrote: > The reason it was bounded was because we (the websockify upstream mantainers) > made a backwards-incompatible change (for good reasons -- it brought > websockify more inline with the Python standard library interfaces). > However, OpenStack had subclass

Re: [openstack-dev] Reverting recent refactorings of RBD support for config drives

Overall, this looks good. Your alternate implementation misses LVM support, and leaves an unused file behind in the instance directory. Other than that, it's acceptable for a late-stage change, IMO. Best Regards, Solly - Original Message - > From: "Michael Still" > To: "OpenStack Dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra] PTL Candidacy

confirmed On 22/09/14 03:05 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > I would like to announce my candidacy for the Infrastructure PTL. > > I have developed and operated the project infrastructure for several > years and have been honored to serve as the PTL for the Juno cycle. > > I was instrumental not only

Re: [openstack-dev] pycharm license?

Hi Devs, I'm working on the new license, but it is taking longer than it normally does as Jetbrains is requiring some new steps to get the license. I'll send out an update when I have it, but until then we'll just have to deal with the pop-ups on start. If I'm remembering correctly, a new licen

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

On 2014-09-22 14:56:04 -0400 (-0400), Sean Dague wrote: > My general understanding is 2.6 support is deprecated for Juno, and fair > to be removed in Kilo. > > So the killing it with fire should be able to happen soon. However, we will still need to continue testing changes to stable/icehouse and

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecating exceptions

On Sep 22, 2014, at 11:07 AM, Radomir Dopieralski wrote: > Horizon's tests were recently broken by a change in the Ceilometer > client that removed a deprecated exception. The exception was deprecated > for a while already, but as it often is, nobody did the > work of removing all references to

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On 22 Sep 2014, at 20:53, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> Monty Taylor wrote: >>> I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote >>> a blog post which Jim Blair and Devananda were kind enough to help me edit. >>> >>> h

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL

-Original Message- From: Dolph Mathews Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Date: September 22, 2014 at 07:50:42 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List > Subject:  [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL > Dearest stackers and [key]stoners, > >

[openstack-dev] [Infra] PTL Candidacy

I would like to announce my candidacy for the Infrastructure PTL. I have developed and operated the project infrastructure for several years and have been honored to serve as the PTL for the Juno cycle. I was instrumental not only in creating the project gating system and development process, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

Right, I understand that. However, the point is that the tenant name is being stored outside of Keystone and it doesn't ever appear to be updated. I had proposed a spec to cache the tenant names for the Big Switch code and it was declined because of the duplication of information. On Sep 22, 2014

Re: [openstack-dev] usability anti-pattern

Monty, your messages are always super-entertaining to read. They also generally have very good points, which is an added bonus :-P - Original Message - > From: "Monty Taylor" > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 9:52:4

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] [nova] requirements freeze exception for websockify

The reason it was bounded was because we (the websockify upstream mantainers) made a backwards-incompatible change (for good reasons -- it brought websockify more inline with the Python standard library interfaces). However, OpenStack had subclassed the WebSocketProxy code, and so the change wou

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

My general understanding is 2.6 support is deprecated for Juno, and fair to be removed in Kilo. So the killing it with fire should be able to happen soon. -Sean On 09/22/2014 02:52 PM, Armando M. wrote: > I suspect that the very reason underlying the existence of this thread > is that so

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Sep 18, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > Hey all, > > I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote > a blog post which Jim Blair and Devananda were kind enough to help me edit. > > http://inaugust.com/post/108 > > Enjoy. I’ve read through this a few times

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Sep 19, 2014, at 10:37 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 09/19/2014 03:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Monty Taylor wrote: >>> I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote >>> a blog post which Jim Blair and Devananda were kind enough to help me edit. >>> >>> http://ina

Re: [openstack-dev] Thoughts on OpenStack Layers and a Big Tent model

On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: >> I've recently been thinking a lot about Sean's Layers stuff. So I wrote >> a blog post which Jim Blair and Devananda were kind enough to help me edit. >> >> http://inaugust.com/post/108 > > Hey Monty, > > As you can i

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

I suspect that the very reason underlying the existence of this thread is that some users out there are not quite ready to pull the plug on Python 2.6. Any decision about stopping the support of Python 2.6 should not be taken solely on making the developer's life easier, but maybe I am stating the

[openstack-dev] [Infra] Meeting Tuesday September 23rd at 19:00 UTC

Hi everyone, The OpenStack Infrastructure (Infra) team is hosting our weekly meeting on Tuesday September 23rd, at 19:00 UTC in #openstack-meeting Meeting agenda available here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/InfraTeamMeeting (anyone is welcome to to add agenda items) Everyone interest

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

I'm in favor of killing Python 2.6 with fire. Honestly, I think it's hurting code readability and productivity -- You have to constantly think about whether or not some feature that the rest of the universe is already using is supported in Python 2.6 whenever you write code. As for readability, t

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL

Thanks a lot Dolph! 2014-09-22 14:58 GMT-03:00 Nathanael Burton : > Thanks Dolph! > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Dolph Mathews > wrote: > >> Dearest stackers and [key]stoners, >> >> With the PTL candidacies officially open for Kilo, I'm going to take the >> opportunity to announce that I

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

Just as an update to what exactly is RHEL python 2.6... This is the expanded source rpm: http://paste.ubuntu.com/8405074/ The main one here appears to be: - python-2.6.6-ordereddict-backport.patch Full changelog @ http://paste.ubuntu.com/8405082/ Overall I'd personally like to get rid of pyth

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

On 09/22/2014 10:58 AM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 10:32 -0700, Armando M. wrote: >> What about: >> >> https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/test-requirements.txt#L12 > > Pulling in ordereddict doesn't do anything if your code doesn't use it > when OrderedDict isn'

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 10:32 -0700, Armando M. wrote: > What about: > > https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/test-requirements.txt#L12 Pulling in ordereddict doesn't do anything if your code doesn't use it when OrderedDict isn't in collections, which is the case here. Further, there's

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Stepping down as PTL

Thanks Dolph! On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > Dearest stackers and [key]stoners, > > With the PTL candidacies officially open for Kilo, I'm going to take the > opportunity to announce that I won't be running again for the position. > > I thoroughly enjoyed my time as PTL

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

Geoff, do you expect all of our users to write all of their messaging code in Python? oslo.messaging is a _python_ library. Zaqar is a service with a REST API -- accessible to any application. As Zane's sarcastic reply implied, these are as related as sharks are to tornados. Could they be combin

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

Akihiro Motoki wrote on 09/22/2014 12:50:43 PM: > From: Akihiro Motoki > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Date: 09/22/2014 12:53 PM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with > Keystone is allowed? > > In Keystone, as Dolph says, a t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

In the patch being referred to here and in the IBM controller, the project ID is the unique identifier used. The name is simply an additional piece of information that may perhaps be used for debugging. The back-end (controller) keeps a name not as a unique identifier but in addition to the unique

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

What about: https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/test-requirements.txt#L12 On 22 September 2014 10:23, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > My team just ran into an issue where neutron was not passing unit tests > when run under Python 2.6. We tracked this down to a test support > function

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [infra] Python 2.6 tests can't possibly be passing in neutron

My team just ran into an issue where neutron was not passing unit tests when run under Python 2.6. We tracked this down to a test support function using collections.OrderedDict. This was in locally forked code, but when I compared it to upstream code, I found that the code in upstream neutron is

[openstack-dev] [Glance] PTL Non-Candidacy

Greetings, I will not be running for PTL for Glance for the Kilo release. I want to thank all of the nice folks I've worked with--especially the attendees and sponsors of the mid-cycle meetups, which I think were a major success and one of the highlights of the project for me. Cheers, markwash _

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

On 09/21/2014 10:57 PM, Nader Lahouti wrote: > Thanks Kevin for bring it up in the ML, I was looking for a guideline or > any document to clarify issues on this subject. > > I was told, even using keystone API in neutron is not permitted. I recognize that I'm potentially without context for neutr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][db] End of meetings for neutron-db

On Sep 22, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Henry Gessau wrote: > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDB > > The work on healing and reorganizing Neutron DB migrations is complete, and so > we will no longer hold meetings. > Great work by all who worked on this. mark

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] To slide or not to slide? OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour...

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:07 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> OK, so we had our inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour last Friday. >> Thanks to Sean and Dan for putting up with my rambling about unittest and >> mock stuff. And

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] To slide or not to slide? OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour...

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > Hi all, > > OK, so we had our inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour last Friday. > Thanks to Sean and Dan for putting up with my rambling about unittest and > mock stuff. And thanks to one of my pugs, Winnie, for, according to Shrews, > "looki

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zaqar] Zaqar and SQS Properties of Distributed Queues

On 22/09/14 10:11, Gordon Sim wrote: On 09/19/2014 09:13 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: SQS offers very, very limited guarantees, and it's clear that the reason for that is to make it massively, massively scalable in the way that e.g. S3 is scalable while also remaining comparably durable (S3 is suppose

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - what integration with Keystone is allowed?

In Keystone, as Dolph says, a tenant name is not globally unique, so IMHO tenant_id needs to be passed to a back-end controller to ensure uniqueness of tenant (or project). tenant_name can be an additional information. For example it can be used in a GUI of a back-end controller, so I think it may

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA] PTL Candidacy

confirmed On 22/09/14 12:32 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > I'd like to throw my hat into the ring for another term as PTL of the QA > program. > > The Juno cycle has been very productive with some big developments in the QA > program including: being the first cycle to implement branchless Tempest

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra][Cinder] Request for voting permissions for Third-party Coraid CI system

On 09/22/2014 12:31 PM, Mykola Grygoriev wrote: > Hi, > > We finished deployment of 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver. > > Following instructions on > http://ci.openstack.org/third_party.html#requesting-a-service-account we > are asking to add gerrit CI account (coraid-ci) to the Voting Third-

[openstack-dev] [QA] PTL Candidacy

I'd like to throw my hat into the ring for another term as PTL of the QA program. The Juno cycle has been very productive with some big developments in the QA program including: being the first cycle to implement branchless Tempest, starting tempest-lib, and consolidating the devstack program with

[openstack-dev] [Infra][Cinder] Request for voting permissions for Third-party Coraid CI system

Hi, We finished deployment of 3d party CI for Сoraid Сinder driver. Following instructions on http://ci.openstack.org/third_party.html#requesting-a-service-account we are asking to add gerrit CI account (coraid-ci) to the Voting Third-Party CI Gerrit group

[openstack-dev] [all] To slide or not to slide? OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour...

Hi all, OK, so we had our inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour last Friday. Thanks to Sean and Dan for putting up with my rambling about unittest and mock stuff. And thanks to one of my pugs, Winnie, for, according to Shrews, "looking like she was drunk." :) One thing we're doing today is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecating exceptions

The larger problem here is that this breaks running Horizon unit tests on all existing installs of Horizon including Havana, Icehouse and Juno if those installations update to the newest python-ceilometerclient. I'm not sure how to handle that type of deprecation other than forcing all existing ins

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

On 09/22/2014 08:58 AM, Matthew Booth wrote: > If you missed the inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour, it's here: > http://youtu.be/jCWtLoSEfmw . I think this is a fantastic idea and big > thanks to Sean, Jay and Dan for doing this. I liked the format, the > informal style and the content. Unfort

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

On 09/22/2014 03:40 PM, Geoff O'Callaghan wrote: That being said I'm not sure why a well constructed zaqar with an rpc interface couldn't meet the requirements of oslo.messsaging and much more. What Zaqar is today and what it might become may of course be different things but as it stands toda

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] - do we need .start and .end notifications in all cases ?

On 09/22/2014 11:22 AM, Jay Lau wrote: Hi Jay, There was actually a discussion about file a blueprint for object notification http://markmail.org/message/ztehzx2wc6dacnk2 But for patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/107954/ , I'd like we keep it as it is now to resolve the requirement of serv

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] - do we need .start and .end notifications in all cases ?

On 09/22/2014 11:42 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote: Totally agree. Though I would go one step further and say the Task state transitions should be managed by notifications. Then oslo.messaging is reduced to the simple notifications interface (no RPC). Notification follow proper retry semantics and contro

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Deprecating exceptions

Regarding ceilometer client, we horizon team at least was not aware of its deprecation. It is not easy thta Horizon team is aware of such changes/warnings in all integrated projects. We might need some liaison from the integrated projects as other projects do. Regarding client backward compatibili

[openstack-dev] [all] In defence of faking

If you missed the inaugural OpenStack Bootstrapping Hour, it's here: http://youtu.be/jCWtLoSEfmw . I think this is a fantastic idea and big thanks to Sean, Jay and Dan for doing this. I liked the format, the informal style and the content. Unfortunately I missed the live event, but I can confirm th

Re: [openstack-dev] Oslo messaging vs zaqar

On 22/09/14 10:40, Geoff O'Callaghan wrote: So On 22/09/2014 10:01 PM, "Zane Bitter" wrote: On 20/09/14 04:17, Geoff O'Callaghan wrote: Hi all, I'm just trying to understand the messaging strategy in openstack.It seems we have at least 2 messaging layers. Oslo.messaging and zaqar, Can

  1   2   >