Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon][i18n] Any Horizon plugins ready for translation in Mitaka?

Hi Daisy, AFAIK the following horizon plugins are ready for translation. I tested and confirmed translations of these two work well with Japanese. A minor improvement on devstack or other stuff are in progress but it does not affect translation. * trove-dashboard * sahara-dashboard The following

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon][i18n] Any Horizon plugins ready for translation in Mitaka?

On 2016-02-23 07:52, Ying Chun Guo wrote: > Hi, > > Mitaka translation will be started from March 4 and ended in the week of > March 28. > I'd like to know which Horizon plugins[1] are ready for translation in > Mitaka release. > If there are, I'm happy to include them in the Mitaka translation pl

[openstack-dev] [tricircle]weekly meeting of Feb.24

IRC meeting: https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=openstack-meeting on every Wednesday starting from UTC 13:00. We did not talk a lot on our agent last meeting, let's continue the discussion. Agenda: # Progress of To-do list review: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/TricircleToDo # SEG # Quota

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-infra] Getting Started Guide

On 2016-02-23 04:45, Kenny Johnston wrote: > * The Product Work Group (PWG) uses the openstack-user-stories > repository and gerrit to review and produce .rst formatted user stories > * The PWG is comprised (mostly) of non-developers > * We've found the Getting Started guide a bit inadequ

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Backup port info to restore the flow rules

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Agent could probably try to restore the state from its internal state. If > that’s the missing bit you want to have, I think that could stand for a > proper RFE. > Good point. Thanks. -- Best, Jian __

[openstack-dev] [nova] Nova API sub-team meeting

We have weekly Nova API meeting tomorrow. The meeting is being held Tuesday UTC1200. The proposed agenda and meeting details are here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NovaAPI Please feel free to add items to the agenda. Thanks ___

[openstack-dev] [horizon][i18n] Any Horizon plugins ready for translation in Mitaka?

Hi, Mitaka translation will be started from March 4 and ended in the week of March 28. I'd like to know which Horizon plugins[1] are ready for translation in Mitaka release. If there are, I'm happy to include them in the Mitaka translation plan. Thank you. Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy) [1

[openstack-dev] [vitrage] Vitrage meeting tomorrow

Hi, We will have Vitrage weekly meeting tomorrow, Wednesday at 9:00 UTC, on #openstack-meeting-3 channel. Agenda: * Current status and progress * Review action items * Next steps * Open Discussion You are welcome to join. Thanks, Ifat. _

[openstack-dev] [rally]how can I give admin role to rally

Hi When I run a scenario about "nova evacuate **", error message was Show as follows. How can I give the admin role to rally user. 2016-02-23 09:18:25.631 6212 INFO rally.task.runner [-] Task e2ad6390-8cde-4ed7-a595-f5c36d5e2a08 | ITER: 0 END: Error Forbidden: User does not have admin p

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-infra] Getting Started Guide

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Kenny Johnston wrote: > >- The Product Work Group (PWG) uses the openstack-user-stories >repository and gerrit to review and produce .rst formatted user stories >- The PWG is comprised (mostly) of non-developers >- We've found the Getting Started g

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] [cinder] How to configure the third party CI to be triggered only when jenkins +1

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 02:07:54AM +, liuxinguo wrote: > Thanks for your input John Griffith, it looks like that the code you modify > is not in layout.yaml (). > Could you tell me the exactly filename where you made the change? > > Thanks very much! > Wilson Liu That is with sos-ci. Basical

[openstack-dev] [openstack-infra] Getting Started Guide

- The Product Work Group (PWG) uses the openstack-user-stories repository and gerrit to review and produce .rst formatted user stories - The PWG is comprised (mostly) of non-developers - We've found the Getting Started guide a bit inadequate for pointing new PWG contributors to in or

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:33 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: OpenStack:How <-- The developer planning event. :) very nice ;) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [stable] iPXE / UEFI support for stable liberty

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 15:15, Chris K wrote: > > Hi Ironicers, > > I wanted to draw attention to iPXE / UEFI support in our stable liberty > branch. Which doesn't exist, right? Or does it work depending on some other factors? > There are environments that require support for UEFI, while iron

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 11:06 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: +1 here. I got an impression that midcycles now usually happen in the US. Indeed, it's probably much cheaper for the majority of contributors, but would make things worse for non-US folks. cost of travel has been a big reason we have never managed t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - DVR L3 data plane performance results and scenarios

Hi all, There is also a control plane performance issue when we try to catch on the spec of typical AWS limit (200 subnets per router). When a router with 200 subnets is scheduled on a new host, a 30s delay is watched when all data plane setup is finished. ___

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] documentation on using the oslo.db opportunistic test feature

On 02/22/2016 09:03 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Sean, > > yes, please let us know which tests fail and we'll try to fix it. There are no currently failing tests, this is attempting to use this for new tests. Follow on question. I think I hacked together something which gets me far enough to ex

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. as a developer, i'm +1 for this. thanks for all the hard work putting this together Thierry. mike __

[openstack-dev] [all][nova][neutron][horizon][keystone][docs] 2016 MAN Ops Meetup - Top 10 Bugs/Features Feedback

I had the honor of moderating a session at the MAN Ops Meetup where we asked operators to identify for the top bugs and feature requests. Whether it was highlighting command line inconsistencies, improvements needed with Nova quotas or the need for tenant scrubber tooling (it exists![1]), the discu

Re: [openstack-dev] Do we need lock fencing?

Agreed seems pretty useful. Unsure exactly how it would be performed in some of the tooz backends, but that's just a technical detail ;) On 02/22/2016 03:41 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: It may also be beneficial to take a page from POSIX "robust mutexes" and introduce a way for the new lock holde

Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] playing tricircle with devstack under two-region configuration

Hi Jeo, I have checked. The Neutron API has not started, but no process is listening 9696. Best regards, Yipei __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack

Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] playing tricircle with devstack under two-region configuration

Hi, Yipei, You can use “ps aux |grep python” to see processes started for OpenStack, and make sure services started successfully. And use “netstat -tulpn | grep :9696” to see which process is listening this port. Maybe your Neutron API has not started successfully. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang (

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] [cinder] How to configure the third party CI to be triggered only when jenkins +1

Thanks for your input John Griffith, it looks like that the code you modify is not in layout.yaml (). Could you tell me the exactly filename where you made the change? Thanks very much! Wilson Liu 发件人: John Griffith [mailto:john.griffi...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2016年2月23日 9:40 收件人: OpenStack Developme

Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] playing tricircle with devstack under two-region configuration

Hi Joe and Zhiyuan, When creating network with AZ scheduler hints specified, I execute "curl -X POST http://127.0.0.1:9696/v2.0/networks -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "X-Auth-Token: $token" -d '{"network": {"name": "net1", "admin_state_up": true, "availability_zone_hints": ["az1"]}}'". Th

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] documentation on using the oslo.db opportunistic test feature

Sean, yes, please let us know which tests fail and we'll try to fix it. Thanks, Dims On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/22/2016 08:08 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Sean, >> >> You need to set the env variable like so. See testenv:mysql-python for >> example >> OS_TEST_

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra][cinder] How to configure the third party CI to be triggered only when jenkins +1

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 6:32 PM, liuxinguo wrote: > Hi, > > > > There is no need to trigger third party CI if a patch does not pass > Jenkins Verify. > > I think there is a way to reach this but I’m not sure how. > > > > So is there any reference or suggestion to configure the third party CI to >

[openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra][cinder] How to configure the third party CI to be triggered only when jenkins +1

Hi, There is no need to trigger third party CI if a patch does not pass Jenkins Verify. I think there is a way to reach this but I'm not sure how. So is there any reference or suggestion to configure the third party CI to be triggered only when jenkins +1? Thanks for any input! Regards, Wilso

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance]one more use case for Image Import Refactor from OPNFV

Hi, Ian, Jay and Brian, Glad to know that the use case could be defined as "Image cloning", a feature ever discussed. As Ian said, the "Image Cloning" seems not only required in OPNFV, but also other cloud operators. So would it possible to discuss "Image cloning" in Austin design summit, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] documentation on using the oslo.db opportunistic test feature

On 02/22/2016 08:08 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Sean, > > You need to set the env variable like so. See testenv:mysql-python for example > OS_TEST_DBAPI_ADMIN_CONNECTION=mysql://openstack_citest:openstack_citest@localhost > > Thanks, > Dims > > [1] > http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=OS_TEST

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] documentation on using the oslo.db opportunistic test feature

Sean, You need to set the env variable like so. See testenv:mysql-python for example OS_TEST_DBAPI_ADMIN_CONNECTION=mysql://openstack_citest:openstack_citest@localhost Thanks, Dims [1] http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=OS_TEST_DBAPI_ADMIN_CONNECTION&i=nope&files=&repos= On Mon, Feb 22, 2016

[openstack-dev] [oslo] documentation on using the oslo.db opportunistic test feature

Before migrating into oslo.db the opportunistic testing for database backends was pretty simple. Create an openstack_citest@openstack_citest pw:openstack_citest and you could get tests running on mysql. This no longer seems to be the case. I went digging through the source code a bit and it's not

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > > > > > On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: > > >On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez < > thie...@openstack.org > >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] Do we need lock fencing?

On 02/19/2016 06:05 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: Hi all, After reading over the following interesting article about redis and redlock (IMHO it's good overview of distributed locking in general): http://martin.kleppmann.com/2016/02/08/how-to-do-distributed-locking.html#protecting-a-resource-with-a-l

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> Hi everyone, > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. > > Long long version: > > In a global and virtual community, high-bandwidth face-to-face time is > essential. This is why we made the OpenStack Design Summits an integral > part of our processes from day 0. Those were

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On 2/22/2016 2:27 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/22/2016 02:50 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 02:42 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 2/22/2016 5:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/19/2016 12:49 PM, John Garbutt wrote: Consider a user that uses these four clouds: * nova-network

[openstack-dev] [heat][magnum] Magnum gate issue

Hi Heat team, It looks Magnum gate broke after this patch was landed: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273631/ . I would appreciate if anyone can help for trouble-shooting the issue. If the issue is confirmed, I would prefer a quick-fix or a revert, since we want to unlock the gate ASAP. Thank

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

+1 I believe that separate design summit give the chances for operators and users can focus on design sessions and gives some great feedback during design summit. We just have to think about how we attract them to there. 2016-02-23 6:07 GMT+08:00 Flavio Percoco : > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] volumes stuck detaching attaching and force detach

On 02/22/2016 11:24 AM, John Garbutt wrote: Hi, Just came up on IRC, when nova-compute gets killed half way through a volume attach (i.e. no graceful shutdown), things get stuck in a bad state, like volumes stuck in the attaching state. This looks like a new addition to this conversation: http:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez > > wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 02/22/2016 12:45 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors /can/ >> still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I just don't >> think every contributor needs to be present a

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Move virtualbox scripts to a separate directory

New git repository fuel-virtualbox has been created https://github.com/openstack/fuel-virtualbox.git and since now all review requests that are related to virtualbox scripts for releases 9.0 and later should be sent to the new git repository. Checklist status: - Launchpad bug: https://bugs.lau

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Walter A. Boring IV wrote: > On 02/22/2016 09:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> Amrith Kumar wrote: >> >>> [...] >>> As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, >>> two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. >>> >> >> Ac

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona > Thank you for the excellent write-up, Thierry (and everyone else behind it)! This sounds great to me. > Long long version: > > In a global and virtual community,

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance]one more use case for Image Import Refactor from OPNFV

On 02/22/2016 09:12 AM, Brian Rosmaita wrote: Hello everyone, Joe, I think you are proposing a perfectly legitimate use case, but it's not what the Glance community is calling "image import", and that's leading to some confusion. The Glance community has defined "image import" as: "A cloud end-

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On 02/22/2016 02:50 PM, Andrew Laski wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 02:42 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> >> >> On 2/22/2016 5:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 02/19/2016 12:49 PM, John Garbutt wrote: >>> Consider a user that uses these four clouds: * nova-network flat DHCP >>>

[openstack-dev] [ironic] weekly subteam status report

Hi, We are glad to present this week's subteam report for Ironic. As usual, this is pulled directly from the Ironic whiteboard[0] and formatted. Bugs (dtantsur) === - Stats (diff with 08.02.2016): - Ironic: 156 bugs (-1) + 175 wishlist items (+5). 14 new, 118 in progress (+2), 0 criti

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] python-novaclient region setting

That's just what I was after - thanks for that! On 23 February 2016 at 03:02, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 02/21/2016 11:40 PM, Andrey Kurilin wrote: > >> Hi! >> `novaclient.client.Client` entry-point supports almost the same >> arguments as `novaclient.v2.client.Client`. The difference is only in >

[openstack-dev] [ironic] [stable] iPXE / UEFI support for stable liberty

Hi Ironicers, I wanted to draw attention to iPXE / UEFI support in our stable liberty branch. There are environments that require support for UEFI, while ironic does have this support in master, it is not capable of this in many configurations when using the stable liberty release and the docs aro

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 09:45 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Amrith Kumar wrote: [...] As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the midcycle event. The new separated contributors-

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance]one more use case for Image Import Refactor from OPNFV

-Original Message- From: Brian Rosmaita Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: February 22, 2016 at 08:14:38 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) , Jay Pipes Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [glance]one more use case for Image

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 02:42 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 2/22/2016 5:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 02/19/2016 12:49 PM, John Garbutt wrote: > > > >> > >> Consider a user that uses these four clouds: > >> * nova-network flat DHCP > >> * nova-network VLAN manager > >> * neutron with a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 07:14 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the events, starting after Barcelona. Time is ripe for a change. After Tokyo, we at the Foundation have been considering options on how to evolve our events to solve those issues. This proposal is the result of thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:20:21PM +, Amrith Kumar wrote: > Thierry and all of those who contributed to putting together this write-up, > thank you very much. > > TL;DR: +0 > > Longer version: > > While I definitely believe that the new proposed timing for "OpenStack > Summit" which is som

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron] How would nova microversion get-me-a-network in the API?

On 2/22/2016 5:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/19/2016 12:49 PM, John Garbutt wrote: Consider a user that uses these four clouds: * nova-network flat DHCP * nova-network VLAN manager * neutron with a single provider network setup * neutron where user needs to create their own network For the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > >> On 22/02/16 18:35, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >> >> Clayton O'Neill wrote: >>> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >>> or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? >>> >>> Personally I’d

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][all] api variation release by release

-Original Message- From: John Garbutt Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: February 22, 2016 at 12:53:49 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [api][all] api variation release by release > On

[openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] volumes stuck detaching attaching and force detach

Hi, Just came up on IRC, when nova-compute gets killed half way through a volume attach (i.e. no graceful shutdown), things get stuck in a bad state, like volumes stuck in the attaching state. This looks like a new addition to this conversation: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

Yeah, I think the really gray issue here is the dependency thing... I think we would mostly agree that depending on a non free component for the actual implementation is bad. So, the dependency through Cassandra on the Oracle JVM is a problem. But if you allow the argument that the plugins being

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 22/02/16 18:35, "Thierry Carrez" wrote: >Clayton O'Neill wrote: >> Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, >> or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? >> >> Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the >> thought that

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 02/22/2016 11:20 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: But the fact remains that nova-compute is doing disk I/O from the main thread, and if the guests push that disk hard enough then nova-comp

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 17:45, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Amrith Kumar wrote: >> [...] >> As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two >> "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. > > Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the midcycle event. The new sepa

[openstack-dev] [Magnum][Kuryr] Kuryr-Magnum integration (nested containers)

Hi folks, The spec [1] for Mangum-Kuryr integration is out and has already gone through good discussion and updates. Please take out some time to review, we would like to converge on the design soon. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269039/5 Thanks, Fawad Khaliq _

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 22/02/16 17:27, "John Garbutt" wrote: >On 22 February 2016 at 15:31, Monty Taylor wrote: >> On 02/22/2016 07:24 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Carrez >>> > wrote: Hi everyone, TL;DR: Let's split the

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][all] api variation release by release

On 13 January 2016 at 14:28, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 1/13/2016 12:11 AM, joehuang wrote: >> >> Thanks for the information, it's good to know the documentation. The >> further question is whether there is any XML format like document will be >> published for each release and all core projects, s

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 22/02/16 19:07, "John Garbutt" wrote: >On 22 February 2016 at 17:38, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 02/22/2016 12:20 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > Hi all, > > We've rec

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Multi-attach, determining when to call os-brick's connector.disconnect_volume

So just attempting to read through this thread, I think I hear: Problems: 1. multi-attach breaks the assumption that made detach work 2. live-migrate, already breaks with some drivers, due to not fully understanding the side affects of all API calls. 3. evacuate and shelve issues also related S

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Back to the original thread: what does "no open core" mean in OpenStack > 2016 ? I think working on that could help sway the Poppy decision one way > or another: my original clarification proposal ("It should have a > fully-functional, pro

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

-Original Message- From: Mike Perez Reply: Mike Perez Date: February 22, 2016 at 11:51:39 To: Ian Cordasco , OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016 > On 02/22/2016 07:19 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > --

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 22/02/16 19:07, "John Garbutt" wrote: >On 22 February 2016 at 17:38, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 02/22/2016 12:20 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > Hi all, > > We've recent

[openstack-dev] (no subject)

From: Ghe Rivero Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit Quoting Clayton O'Neill (2016-02-22 10:27:04) > Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, > or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? > > Personally I’d

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Amrith raises an interesting point. This proposal moves from effectively 4 dev events a year to 2 dev events a year, thus *reducing* the amount of face-to-face time we have. While my first reaction to the proposed changes is positive, de facto reduction of time spent together as devs seems coun

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 04:14:06PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> The idea would be to split the events. The first event would be for upstream >> technical contributors to OpenStack. It would be held in a simpler, >> scaled-back setting that woul

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 22 February 2016 at 17:38, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/22/2016 12:20 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: Hi all, We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thoug

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Matt Fischer wrote: > Cross-post to openstack-operators... > > As an operator, there's value in me attending some of the design summit > sessions to provide feedback and guidance. But I don't really need to be in > the room for a week discussing minutiae of implem

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

On 02/22/2016 12:45 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: I don't think the proposal removes that opportunity. Contributors /can/ still go to OpenStack Summits. They just don't /have to/. I just don't think every contributor needs to be present at every OpenStack Summit, while I'd like to see most of them pr

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

On 02/22/2016 07:19 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Mike Perez Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: February 19, 2016 at 19:21:13 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Amrith Kumar wrote: [...] As a result of this proposal, there will still be four events each year, two "OpenStack Summit" events and two "MidCycle" events. Actually, the OpenStack summit becomes the midcycle event. The new separated contributors-oriented event[tm] happens at the beginning of

[openstack-dev] [puppet] weekly meeting #71

Hi, We'll have our weekly meeting tomorrow at 3pm UTC on #openstack-meeting4. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/PuppetOpenStack As usual, free free to bring topics in this etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/puppet-openstack-weekly-meeting-20160223 We'll also have open discussion

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 02/22/2016 12:20 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thought I >>> should bring up to see if we want to do anythin

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Clayton O'Neill wrote: Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the thought that operators aren’t likely to be interested in work sessions,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

+1 2016-02-22 18:27 GMT+01:00 Clayton O'Neill : > Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, > or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? > > Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the > thought that operators aren’t likely

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > > On 02/22/2016 11:30 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > > On 02/22/2016 11:17 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thought I >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Is the expectation that the ops mid-cycle would continue separately, or be held with the meeting formerly known as the Design Summit? Personally I’d prefer they be held together, but scheduled with the thought that operators aren’t likely to be interested in work sessions, but that a good number o

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] discussion about core reviewer limitations by company

On 2/22/16, 10:13 AM, "Jeff Peeler" wrote: >On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) >wrote: >> The issue isn't about reviewing patches in my opinion. Obviously people >> shouldn't jam patches through the review queue that they know will be >> counter-productive to the majority v

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:37PM -0500, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thought I > > should bring up to see if we want to do anything about it. > > > > Basically the problem seems to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

Thierry and all of those who contributed to putting together this write-up, thank you very much. TL;DR: +0 Longer version: While I definitely believe that the new proposed timing for "OpenStack Summit" which is some months after the release, is a huge improvement, I am not completely enamored

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Should we rename "RDO Manager" to "TripleO" ?

As a reminder, we will proceed with a formal vote on $subject at the next RDO meeting on Wednesday, 24th Feb, 2016 1500 UTC [1]. Feel free to join us on #rdo on freenode. [1]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RDO-Meeting David Moreau Simard Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO dmsimard = [ir

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] A proposal to separate the design summit

> On Feb 22, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Clayton O'Neill wrote: > > I think this is a great proposal, but like Matt I’m curious how it > might impact the operator sessions that have been part of the Design > Summit and the Operators Mid-Cycle. > > As an operator I got a lot out of the cross-project desig

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] nova-compute blocking main thread under heavy disk IO

On 02/22/2016 11:30 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 02/22/2016 11:17 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 02/22/2016 10:43 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: Hi all, We've recently run into some interesting behaviour that I thought I should bring up to see if we want to do anything about it. Basically the problem see

Re: [openstack-dev] [Rdo-list] [TripleO] Should we rename "RDO Manager" to "TripleO" ?

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Dan Prince wrote: > Does this mean RDO Manager will be adopting use of the nicely rounded > owl mascot as well? > > http://tripleo.org/ > > As far as upstream branding goes this would really make it crystal > clear to me... :) "RDO Manager" won't exist anymore. Pe

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.messaging 4.4.0 release (mitaka)

We are content to announce the release of: oslo.messaging 4.4.0: Oslo Messaging API This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.messaging With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.messagin

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] tooz 1.32.0 release (mitaka)

We are happy to announce the release of: tooz 1.32.0: Coordination library for distributed systems. This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/tooz With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/tooz P

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] taskflow 1.29.0 release (mitaka)

We are amped to announce the release of: taskflow 1.29.0: Taskflow structured state management library. This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/taskflow With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] discussion about core reviewer limitations by company

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > The issue isn't about reviewing patches in my opinion. Obviously people > shouldn't jam patches through the review queue that they know will be > counter-productive to the majority view of the core reviewers. If they do, > they can e

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.service 1.6.0 release (mitaka)

We are tickled pink to announce the release of: oslo.service 1.6.0: oslo.service library This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.service With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.servi

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslotest 2.2.0 release (mitaka)

We are gleeful to announce the release of: oslotest 2.2.0: Oslo test framework This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslotest With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslotest Please report

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.privsep 1.2.0 release (mitaka)

We are tickled pink to announce the release of: oslo.privsep 1.2.0: OpenStack library for privilege separation This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.privsep With package available at: https://pypi.pyth

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.config 3.8.0 release (mitaka)

We are pumped to announce the release of: oslo.config 3.8.0: Oslo Configuration API This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.config With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.config Ple

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.concurrency 3.5.0 release (mitaka)

We are chuffed to announce the release of: oslo.concurrency 3.5.0: Oslo Concurrency library This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.concurrency With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/osl

[openstack-dev] [release][oslo] oslo.log 3.1.0 release (mitaka)

We are pleased to announce the release of: oslo.log 3.1.0: oslo.log library This release is part of the mitaka release series. With source available at: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.log With package available at: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.log Please report iss

  1   2   >