Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][NFV] VIF_VHOSTUSER

On 1 September 2014 09:10, loy wolfe wrote: > If the neutron side MD is just for snabbswitch, then I thinks there is no > change to be merged into the tree. Maybe we can learn from sriov nic, > although backend is vendor specific, but the MD is generic, can support > snabb, dpdkovs, ans other use

Re: [openstack-dev] [releases] pbr, postversioning, integrated release workflow

Robert Collins wrote: > [...] > Here's what happens. > > The two interacting rules are this: > - pbr will now error if it tries to create a version number lower > than the last release (and releases are found via the git tags in the > branch). > - pbr treats preversion version numbers as a hard

[openstack-dev] [all] Juno Feature freeze - stop approving random changes

Hi everyone, Feature freeze is upon us, and with it, its inevitable 20-hour deep gate queue. At this point the goal is to complete as many features as possible before we tag juno-3 (ideally on Thursday). Given the queue depth, anything that's not already in-flight has little chances of making it b

[openstack-dev] [Infra] [All] Long test queue relieve

Hi All, Looking the queue lengths from Zuul, one thing came to my mind. There is quite a few heavy non-voting test jobs running specifically on the check lines. Would it be possible to disable these non-voting jobs, lets say, week before freeze and re-enable them after the rush has calmed down?

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

On 9/3/14 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: I thought there was now a thung where zuul can use a different account per pipeline? That was the most likely solution we discussed at the summit, but I don't believe we've implemented it yet (

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Meeting time update

As you all (hopefully) know, our meetings alternate between Tuesdays 19:00 UTC and Wednesdays 7:00 UTC. Because of the whining^W weekly-expressed preferences[1] of the Europe-based folks, the latter meetings are going to be moved by +1 hour. So the new meeting times are: * Tuesdays at 19:00 UTC

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra][Neutron] How to verify link to logs for disabled third-party CI

On 9/3/14 12:11 PM, Gary Duan wrote: Hi, Our CI system is disabled due to a running bug and wrong log link. I have manually verified the system with sandbox and two Neutron testing patches. However, with CI disabled, I am not able to see its review comment on any patch. Is there a way that

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Review metrics - what do we want to measure?

We would benefit a great deal from having this sooner. On 3 September 2014 20:11, Joshua Hesketh wrote: > On 9/3/14 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> >> On 2014-09-03 11:51:13 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: >>> >>> I thought there was now a thung where zuul can use a different account >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [infra] Alpha wheels for Python 3.x

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: > > Hello. > > > > Currently for alpha releases of oslo libraries we generate either > > universal > > or Python 2.x-only wheels. This presents a problem: we can't adopt alpha > > release

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 09/02/2014 09:23 PM, Michael Still wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: >> On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent >>> email. I'd like to outline the process for requesting a freeze

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][Nova]Quest about Cinder Brick proposal

On 3 September 2014 01:20, Emma Lin wrote: > Thank you all for the prompt response. And I’m glad to see the progress on > this topic. > Basically, what I’m thinking is the local storage support for big data and > large scale computing is specially useful. > > I’ll monitor the meeting progress acti

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] instance lock and class lock

Zang MingJie, Can you please consider submitting a review against oslo.concurrency? http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/oslo.concurrency/tree/oslo/concurrency That will help everyone who will adopt/use that library. thanks, dims On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Zang MingJie wrote: > Hi all

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 9/3/14, 12:50 PM, "Nikola Đipanov" wrote: >On 09/02/2014 09:23 PM, Michael Still wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov >>wrote: >>> On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote: Hi. We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Thierry's recent emai

[openstack-dev] [solum] Consistency of development environment

Hello, I've been looking at Solum for about a couple of months now, with the goal of eventually contributing to this project. First off, my apologies if this is the wrong place for my question. I'm currently getting familiar with project structure, source code, and also trying to set up the d

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

On 09/02/2014 11:19 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: Excerpts from Nejc Saje's message of 2014-09-01 07:48:46 +: Hey guys, in Ceilometer we're using consistent hash rings to do workload partitioning[1]. We've considered generalizing your hash ring implementation and moving it up to oslo, but unf

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

On 09/02/2014 11:33 PM, Robert Collins wrote: The implementation in ceilometer is very different to the Ironic one - are you saying the test you linked fails with Ironic, or that it fails with the ceilometer code today? Disclaimer: in Ironic terms, node = conductor, key = host The test I lin

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

Sorry, forgot to link the reference: [1] https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/b56db42aa39e855e558a52eb71e656ea14380f8a/ironic/common/hash_ring.py#L72 On 09/03/2014 01:50 PM, Nejc Saje wrote: On 09/02/2014 11:33 PM, Robert Collins wrote: The implementation in ceilometer is very differen

[openstack-dev] [openstack][nova] Resize: allow_resize_to_same_host=True fails

This mail is regarding the flag "allow_resize_to_same_host=True" in nova.conf. Currently Nova allows to resize the instance across different host by default and it provides the flag "allow_resize_to_same_host" to set to "True", when resize is required to be tested in single host environment. B

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

> On 09/02/2014 11:33 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > > The implementation in ceilometer is very different to the Ironic one - > > are you saying the test you linked fails with Ironic, or that it fails > > with the ceilometer code today? > > Disclaimer: in Ironic terms, node = conductor, key = host

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Status of Neutron at Juno-3

Given how deep the merge queue is (146 currently), we've effectively reached feature freeze in Neutron now (likely other projects as well). So this morning I'm going to go through and remove BPs from Juno which did not make the merge window. I'll also be putting temporary -2s in the patches to ensu

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

Stefano Maffulli wrote: > On 08/29/2014 11:17 AM, John Garbutt wrote: >> After moving to use ZNC, I find IRC works much better for me now, but >> I am still learning really. > > There! this sentence has two very important points worth highlighting: > > 1- when people say IRC they mean IRC + a hac

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Meeting time update

Tomas Sedovic wrote: > As you all (hopefully) know, our meetings alternate between Tuesdays > 19:00 UTC and Wednesdays 7:00 UTC. > > Because of the whining^W weekly-expressed preferences[1] of the > Europe-based folks, the latter meetings are going to be moved by +1 hour. > > So the new meeting t

[openstack-dev] [Glance][Nova][All] requests 2.4.0 breaks glanceclient

Hi All, While investigating glanceclient gating issues we narrowed it down to requests 2.4.0 which was released 2014-08-29. Urllib3 seems to be raising new ProtocolError which does not get catched and breaks at least glanceclient. Following error can be seen on console "ProtocolError: ('Connecti

[openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patches like - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76817/6, however, they do. All of these need to be -2ed with predjudice. requirements.txt is not a declarative interface. The order is important as pip processes it in the order it is.

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

Thierry Carrez wrote: > Note that ZNC is not the only IRC proxy out there. Bip is also working > quite well. Note also that an IRC proxy is not the only solution. Using a console IRC client on a server works well for me. Irssi or weechat are both simple to set up. signature.asc Description: Digi

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

Another well working option that can be easily used: 1) get a Linux system with internet connection (local box, VM in a cloud, whatever floats your boat) 2) install irssi and screen 3) run irssi in a screen Now you can login (local console, ssh, telnet, mosh again pick your preferred) into

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][Nova][All] requests 2.4.0 breaks glanceclient

Honestly, I don't think we should pin this. This seems like a pretty easy fix in the code and the only unit tests that are failing are the ones testing invalid endpoints. My vote is to fix glanceclient instead and do a release. -Sean On 09/03/2014 08:30 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: > Hi All,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patches > like - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76817/6, however, they do. > > All of these need to be -2ed with predjudice. > > requirements.txt is not a declarative i

[openstack-dev] [nova][SR-IOV] Please review this patch series: replace pci_request storage with proper object usage

Hi, the patch series: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117781/5 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117895/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117839/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/118391/ is ready for review. This needs to get in before Juno feature freeze so that the sr-iov patches can land i

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 14:03 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > > I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patches > > like - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76817/6, however, they do. > > > > All of these need t

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On 09/03/2014 09:03 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: >> I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patches >> like - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76817/6, however, they do. >> >> All of these need to be -2ed with p

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][Nova]Quest about Cinder Brick proposal

Thanks for your update. I¹m learning the function recently, Might have more question to you soon. Thanks Emma On 3/9/14 6:51 pm, "Duncan Thomas" wrote: >On 3 September 2014 01:20, Emma Lin wrote: >> Thank you all for the prompt response. And I¹m glad to see the progress >>on >> this topic. >> B

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

Le 03/09/2014 14:38, Kuvaja, Erno a écrit : Another well working option that can be easily used: 1) get a Linux system with internet connection (local box, VM in a cloud, whatever floats your boat) 2) install irssi and screen 3) run irssi in a screen Now you can login (local console, ssh, teln

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance][feature freeze exception] Proposal for using Launcher/ProcessLauncher for launching services

Hi All, Please give your support me for applying the freeze exception for using oslo-incubator service framework in glance, based on the following blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/use-common-service-framework I have ensured that after making these changes everything is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][Nova]Quest about Cinder Brick proposal

Emma I encourage you to join the cinder RIC channel, #openstack-cinder, on the freenode irc network (irc.freenode.net) to ask questions, you'll get much more interactive feedback there. Regards -- Duncan ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@l

Re: [openstack-dev] Treating notifications as a contract

Is there anything slated for the Paris summit around this? I just spent nearly a week parsing Nova notifications and the pain of no schema has overtaken me. We're chatting with IBM about CADF and getting down to specifics on their applicability to notifications. Once I get StackTach.v3 into pr

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance][feature freeze exception] Proposal for using Launcher/ProcessLauncher for launching services

In principle I like the idea and concept, a lot. In practice I don't think glance code is ready in a state that we could say SIGHUP reloads our configs. Even more my concern is that based on the behavior seen some config options gets picked up and some does not. As long as we do not have defini

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Nejc Saje wrote: > > > On 09/02/2014 11:33 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >> >> The implementation in ceilometer is very different to the Ironic one - >> are you saying the test you linked fails with Ironic, or that it fails >> with the ceilometer code today? > > > Disc

[openstack-dev] [QA] Meeting Thursday September 4th at 22:00 UTC

Hi everyone, Just a quick reminder that the weekly OpenStack QA team IRC meeting will be tomorrow Thursday, September 4th at 22:00 UTC in the #openstack-meeting channel. The agenda for tomorrow's meeting can be found here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/QATeamMeeting Anyone is welcome t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][Nova]Quest about Cinder Brick proposal

That¹s good. Thanks for your suggestion. On 3/9/14 9:44 pm, "Duncan Thomas" wrote: >openstack-cinder ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

On 09/03/2014 09:35 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > Re: ZNC as a service, I think it's OK provided the implementation is > open-sourced with openstack-infra repo group, as for Gerrit, Zuul and > others. > The only problem I can see is how to provide IRC credentials to this, as > I don't want to share my

Re: [openstack-dev] Treating notifications as a contract

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Sandy Walsh wrote: Is there anything slated for the Paris summit around this? There are plans to make plans, but that's about all I know. I just spent nearly a week parsing Nova notifications and the pain of no schema has overtaken me. /me passes the ibuprofen We're c

Re: [openstack-dev] [solum] Consistency of development environment

Alex, Thanks for your question, and for your interest in Solum. Our current dev environment setup relies on devstack to produce a working OpenStack environment for Solum to run within. We have noticed lately that our devstack setup does not always work. Because we are checking out devstack code

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

On 09/03/2014 07:31 AM, Gary Kotton wrote: On 9/3/14, 12:50 PM, "Nikola Đipanov" wrote: On 09/02/2014 09:23 PM, Michael Still wrote: On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote: On 09/02/2014 08:16 PM, Michael Still wrote: Hi. We're soon to hit feature freeze, as discussed in Th

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Status of Neutron at Juno-3

On 09/03/2014 08:17 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > Given how deep the merge queue is (146 currently), we've effectively > reached feature freeze in Neutron now (likely other projects as well). > So this morning I'm going to go through and remove BPs from Juno which > did not make the merge window. I'll

Re: [openstack-dev] Rally scenario Issue

The reason this is failing is you are specifying a fixed network and at the same time asking for a new network to be created using context. What happens is the VM gets attached to your fixed network instead of the created Rally network So you need to modify vm_tasks.py for this case and basically

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Status of Neutron at Juno-3

On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:04 AM, Brian Haley wrote: > On 09/03/2014 08:17 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: >> Given how deep the merge queue is (146 currently), we've effectively >> reached feature freeze in Neutron now (likely other projects as well). >> So this morning I'm going to go through and remove BP

Re: [openstack-dev] Treating notifications as a contract

On 9/3/2014 11:32 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Sandy Walsh wrote: > >> We're chatting with IBM about CADF and getting down to specifics on >> their applicability to notifications. Once I get StackTach.v3 into >> production I'm keen to get started on revisiting the notification >> for

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [infra] Alpha wheels for Python 3.x

On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: >> Hello. >> >> Currently for alpha releases of oslo libraries we generate either >> universal >> or Python 2.x-only wheels. This presents a problem: we can't adopt alpha >> releases in proj

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [infra] Alpha wheels for Python 3.x

On Sep 3, 2014, at 5:27 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: > > Hello. > > > > Currently for alpha releases of oslo libraries we generate either > > universal > > or Python 2.x-only wheels. This

Re: [openstack-dev] Treating notifications as a contract

> > For example: It appears that CADF was designed for this sort of thing and> > > > was considered at some point in the past. It would be useful to know> > > > more of that story if there are any pointers.> >> > My initial reaction is > > that CADF has the stank of enterprisey all over> > it ra

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Pre-5.1 and master builds ISO are available for download

Dmitry, I totally agree that we should support nightly builds in upgrades. I've created a blueprint for this: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/upgrade-nightly On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > We should not confuse beta and rc builds, normally betas predate

[openstack-dev] Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise

As you all know, there has recently been several very active discussions around how to improve assorted aspects of our development process. One idea that was brought up is to come up with a list of cycle goals/project priorities for Kilo [0]. To that end, I would like to propose an exercise as dis

Re: [openstack-dev] Treating notifications as a contract

On Sep 3, 2014, at 9:50 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote: > Is there anything slated for the Paris summit around this? > > I just spent nearly a week parsing Nova notifications and the pain of no > schema has overtaken me. > > We're chatting with IBM about CADF and getting down to specifics on their >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Status of Neutron at Juno-3

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Mark McClain wrote: > > On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:04 AM, Brian Haley wrote: > >> On 09/03/2014 08:17 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: >>> Given how deep the merge queue is (146 currently), we've effectively >>> reached feature freeze in Neutron now (likely other projects as we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Goals for 5.1.1 & 6.0

Feature blockers: Versioning for REST API , UI, serialization Ongoing activities: Nailgun plugin

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [infra] Alpha wheels for Python 3.x

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 08:22 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: > >> Hello. > >> > >> Currently for alpha releases of oslo libraries we generate either > >> universal > >> or Python 2.x-only

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

> I will follow up with a more detailed email about what I believe we are > missing, once the FF settles and I have applied some soothing creme to > my burnout wounds, but currently my sentiment is: > > Contributing features to Nova nowadays SUCKS!!1 (even as a core > reviewer) We _have_ to change

Re: [openstack-dev] Rally scenario Issue

Please pass on your VMTasks.py. Further, floating ips are available. Thanks for the help! On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Ajay Kalambur (akalambu) wrote: > The reason this is failing is you are specifying a fixed network and at > the same time asking for a new network to be created using cont

Re: [openstack-dev] Kilo Cycle Goals Exercise

On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Joe Gordon wrote: > As you all know, there has recently been several very active discussions > around how to improve assorted aspects of our development process. One idea > that was brought up is to come up with a list of cycle goals/project > priorities for Kilo [0]

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/03/2014 09:03 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > >> I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patches > >> like - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76817/6,

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [infra] Alpha wheels for Python 3.x

On Sep 3, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 08:22 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> >> On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: Hello. Currently for alpha releases of oslo libraries w

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Sep 3, 2014, at 12:20 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/03/2014 09:03 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > >> I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "sort requirements" patc

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 02:23:41PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Stefano Maffulli wrote: > > On 08/29/2014 11:17 AM, John Garbutt wrote: > >> After moving to use ZNC, I find IRC works much better for me now, but > >> I am still learning really. > > > > There! this sentence has two very important

Re: [openstack-dev] [Infra][Neutron] How to verify link to logs for disabled third-party CI

Thanks Joshua. I will give it a try. Gary On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Joshua Hesketh wrote: > On 9/3/14 12:11 PM, Gary Duan wrote: > > Hi, > > Our CI system is disabled due to a running bug and wrong log link. I > have manually verified the system with sandbox and two Neutron testing > p

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 07:26 AM, Ryan Brown wrote: > On 09/03/2014 09:35 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > Re: ZNC as a service, I think it's OK provided the implementation is > > open-sourced with openstack-infra repo group, as for Gerrit, Zuul and > > others. > > The only problem I can see is how to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Sep 3, 2014, at 12:20 PM, Dolph Mathews > wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 09/03/2014 09:03 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:37:17AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: >> >> I'm

Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] Domain-specific Drivers

On 08/26/2014 06:12 AM, Henry Nash wrote: Hi It was fully merged for Juno-2 - so if you are having problems, feel free to share the settings in you main config and keystone.heat.config files Henry On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:26, Bruno Luis Dos Santos Bompastor mailto:bruno.bompas...@cern.ch>> wro

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Infra] VMWare NSX CI - recheck info

Hi Kurt, We (Arista) were one of the early adapters of the CI systems. We built our system based upon the Neutron requirements as of late last year/early this year. Our CI has been up and operational since January of this year. This is before (or in parallel to Jay Pipes effort of Zuul based CIs).

[openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][feature freeze exception] Can I get an exception for AMQP 1.0?

Hello, I'm proposing a freeze exception for the oslo.messaging AMQP 1.0 driver: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75815/ Blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo.messaging/+spec/amqp10-driver-implementation I presented this work at the Juno summit [1]. The associated spec has bee

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] collecting recheck command to re-trigger third party CI

Hi Neutron team, There are many third party CI in Neutron and we sometimes/usually want to retrigger third party CI to confirm results. A comment syntax varies across third party CI, so I think it is useful to gather "recheck command" in one place. I struggled to know how to rerun a specific CI.

Re: [openstack-dev] Rally scenario Issue

Hello Timur, I have one question, so I am testing rally boot and delete scenario, it seems to work fine when tenant is 1 and user is 1. Although if I change tenant to 2 and users 2, I see below error. Any idea why this can happen ? = 2014-09-03 10:51:18.138 17441 CRITICAL rally [-] Service

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Feature Freeze Exception process for Juno

+1 I had several pacthes in "start lxc from block device" series. The blueprint was waiting since Icehouse. In Juno it was approved, however, besides Daniel Berrange no one was looking at these patches. Now it's being pushed to Kilo, regadless of the fact that everything is +2ed. Normally, I do

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

Anyone know what happened to (or is happening) to: https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/988 'Pip needs a real dependency resolver' Maybe it's time we as a community helped pip get that feature in? -Josh On Sep 3, 2014, at 5:37 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > I'm not sure why people keep showing up wit

Re: [openstack-dev] znc as a service (was Re: [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?)

Here is a docker image that will bring up subway. https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/nibalizer/subway/ On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 07:26 AM, Ryan Brown wrote: > > On 09/03/2014 09:35 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > Re: ZNC as a service, I think

[openstack-dev] [rally][iperf] Benchmarking network performance

Hi Looking into the following blueprint which requires that network performance tests be done as part of a scenario I plan to implement this using iperf and basically a scenario which includes a client/server VM pair The client than sends out TCP traffic using iperf to server and the VM through

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

> -Original Message- > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > Sent: 03 September 2014 13:37 > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt > > I'm not sure why people keep showing up with "s

Re: [openstack-dev] [glance][feature freeze exception] Proposal for using Launcher/ProcessLauncher for launching services

Hi Erno, I agree that we must document what all config parameters will be reloaded after SIGHUP signal is processed, that's the reason why we have added DocImpact tag to patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117988/. We will test what parameters are reloaded and report them to the Doc team.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > > Sent: 03 September 2014 13:37 > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort req

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][Nova][All] requests 2.4.0 breaks glanceclient

Excerpts from Kuvaja, Erno's message of 2014-09-03 12:30:08 +: > Hi All, > > While investigating glanceclient gating issues we narrowed it down to > requests 2.4.0 which was released 2014-08-29. Urllib3 seems to be raising new > ProtocolError which does not get catched and breaks at least gl

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][Nova][All] requests 2.4.0 breaks glanceclient

On 09/03/2014 03:12 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: > Excerpts from Kuvaja, Erno's message of 2014-09-03 12:30:08 +: >> Hi All, >> >> While investigating glanceclient gating issues we narrowed it down to >> requests 2.4.0 which was released 2014-08-29. Urllib3 seems to be raising >> new ProtocolErr

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][feature freeze exception] Can I get an exception for AMQP 1.0?

On Sep 3, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: > Hello, > > I'm proposing a freeze exception for the oslo.messaging AMQP 1.0 > driver: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75815/ > > Blueprint: > > > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo.messaging/+spec/amqp10-driver-implementation > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [UX] [Horizon] [Heat] Merlin project (formerly known as cross-project UI library for Heat/Mistral/Murano/Solum) plans for PoC and more

Zane, Thank you. I have added ASL 2.0. Drago On 8/28/14, 9:10 PM, "Zane Bitter" wrote: >On 28/08/14 13:31, Drago Rosson wrote: >> You are in luck, because I have just now open-sourced Barricade! Check >>it >> out [4]. >> >> [4]https://github.com/rackerlabs/barricade > >Please add a license (pr

Re: [openstack-dev] Unexpected error in OpenStack Nova

Any Idea? On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Hossein Zabolzadeh wrote: > Hi, > After successful installation of both keystone and nova, I tried to > execute the 'nova list' command by the folllowing env variables(My > Deployment Model is single machine deployment): > export OS_USERNAME=admin > exp

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

> -Original Message- > From: Clark Boylan [mailto:cboy...@sapwetik.org] > Sent: 03 September 2014 20:10 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][qa][neutron] Neutron full job, advanced services, and the integrated gate

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: > TL; DR > A few folks are proposing to stop running tests for neutron advanced > services [ie: (lb|vpn|fw)aas] in the integrated gate, and run them only on > the neutron gate. > > Reason: projects like nova are 100% orthogonal to neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] (Non-)consistency of the Ironic hash ring implementation

On 3 September 2014 23:50, Nejc Saje wrote: Forgive my slowness :). > Disclaimer: in Ironic terms, node = conductor, key = host Sadly not inside the hash_ring code :/. host == conductor, key == data. > The test I linked fails with Ironic hash ring code (specifically the part > that tests consi

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][qa][neutron] Neutron full job, advanced services, and the integrated gate

On 08/26/2014 07:47 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: > TL; DR > A few folks are proposing to stop running tests for neutron advanced > services [ie: (lb|vpn|fw)aas] in the integrated gate, and run them only > on the neutron gate. > > Reason: projects like nova are 100% orthogonal to neutron advanced >

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][qa][neutron] Neutron full job, advanced services, and the integrated gate

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 08/26/2014 07:47 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: >> TL; DR >> A few folks are proposing to stop running tests for neutron advanced >> services [ie: (lb|vpn|fw)aas] in the integrated gate, and run them only >> on the neutron gate. >> >> Reason: pr

Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party] [infra] New mailing lists for third party announcements and account requests

On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Elizabeth K. Joseph wrote: > Third-party-request > > This list is the new place to request the creation or modification of > your third party account. Note that old requests sent to the > openstack-infra mailing list don't need to be resubmitted, they are > alread

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 01:06 PM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Clark Boylan [mailto:cboy...@sapwetik.org] > > Sent: 03 September 2014 20:10 > > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort > > requirements.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] libvirt version_cap, a postmortem

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > Hey > > The libvirt version_cap debacle continues to come up in conversation and > one perception of the whole thing appears to be: > > A controversial patch was "ninjaed" by three Red Hat nova-cores and > then the same individuals p

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][Nova][All] requests 2.4.0 breaks glanceclient

On 9/3/14, 2:20 PM, "Sean Dague" wrote: >On 09/03/2014 03:12 PM, Gregory Haynes wrote: >> Excerpts from Kuvaja, Erno's message of 2014-09-03 12:30:08 +: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> While investigating glanceclient gating issues we narrowed it down to >>>requests 2.4.0 which was released 2014-08-29. U

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra][qa][neutron] Neutron full job, advanced services, and the integrated gate

On 3 September 2014 22:10, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Salvatore Orlando > wrote: > >> TL; DR >> A few folks are proposing to stop running tests for neutron advanced >> services [ie: (lb|vpn|fw)aas] in the integrated gate, and run them only on >> the neutron gate.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] collecting recheck command to re-trigger third party CI

+1 It would also be really helpful if the recheck command is shown in the output of the results from each CI so the developer doesn't even have to visit this page. On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > Hi Neutron team, > > There are many third party CI in Neutron and we some

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt

> -Original Message- > From: Clark Boylan [mailto:cboy...@sapwetik.org] > Sent: 03 September 2014 21:57 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [glance] do NOT ever sort requirements.txt > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014, at 01:06 PM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] collecting recheck command to re-trigger third party CI

On 09/03/2014 02:03 PM, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > Hi Neutron team, > > There are many third party CI in Neutron and we sometimes/usually > want to retrigger third party CI to confirm results. > A comment syntax varies across third party CI, so I think it is useful > to gather "recheck command" in on

[openstack-dev] [all] Alpha release of Congress

Hi all, The alpha release of Congress is now available! We'd love any and all feedback. Components and Features - Support for policy monitoring - Policy engine implementation - Message-passing architecture - Drivers for Nova and Neutron - Devstack integration - Documentation - REST API README (

[openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][feature freeze exception] Can I get an exception for AMQP 1.0?

On Wed Sep 3 19:23:52 UTC 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote: >On Sep 3, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'm proposing a freeze exception for the oslo.messaging AMQP 1.0 >> driver: >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75815/ >> Thanks, >> >> Ken > >Ken, > >I think we’re generally i

[openstack-dev] [sahara] integration tests in python-saharaclient

Hi team, Today I've realized that we have some tests called 'integration' in python-saharaclient. Also I've found out that Jenkins doesn't use them and they can't be run starting from April because of typo in tox.ini. Does anyone know what these tests are? Does anyone mind if I delete them since

  1   2   >