[openstack-dev] [api] [Nova] [Ironic] [Magnum] Microversion guideline in API-WG

Hi, guys, I'm working on adding Microversion into the API-WG's guideline which make sure we have consistent Microversion behavior in the API for user. The Nova and Ironic already have Microversion implementation, and as I know Magnum https://review.openstack.org/#/c/184975/ is going to implement

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] [nova] [oslo] [cross-project] Dynamic Policy

I dont see why this is not possible. The DB has an API which allows each service to retrieve its own policy, so with an appropriate helper app then any service should be able to read a serialised policy from the DB as if it were reading in a file from the local file store regards David On 04/06/

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][reseller] New way to get a project scoped token by name

I agree that it is better to choose one global delimiter (ideally this should have been done from day one, when hierarchical naming should have been used as the basic name form for Openstack). Whatever you choose now will cause someone somewhere some pain, but perhaps the overall pain to the whole

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][barbican] Regarding exposing X-Group-xxxx in token validation

For Fernet, the groups would only be populated on validate as Dolph outlined. They would not be added to the core payload. We do not want to expand the payload in this manner. --Morgan Sent via mobile > On Jun 3, 2015, at 21:51, Lance Bragstad wrote: > > I feel if we allowed group ids to be

Re: [openstack-dev] [Manila] Midcycle meetup dates

On 30.05.2015 16:11, Ben Swartzlander wrote: > What remains to be decided: > > Week of July 20-24 or week of July 27-31? Both fine for me, but I can't join in person. > Which days of the week? Wed-Thu would be good. __ Ope

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Getting `ValueError: Field `volume_id' cannot be None`

Hi Thang, Since you are working on Snapshot Objects, any idea on why the testcase when run all by itself, works, but when run as part of the overall suite, fails ? This seems to be related to the Snapshot Objects, hence Ccing you. On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Deepak Shetty wrote: > Hi All,

Re: [openstack-dev] Targeting icehouse-eol?

Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 09:06:29AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> Following on the thread about no longer doing stable point releases [1] at >> the summit we talked about doing icehouse-eol pretty soon [2]. >> >> I scrubbed the open stable/icehouse patches last week and w

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] openstacklib::db::sync proposal

On 06/03/2015 02:32 PM, Martin Mágr wrote: is *not* necessary __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstac

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [all] Liberty summit: Updates in Glance

On 04/06/15 12:19 +0900, Joe Gordon wrote: On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 01/06/15 13:30 +0100, John Garbutt wrote: On 1 June 2015 at 13:10, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 01/06/15 11:57 +0100, John Garbutt wrote: On 26/05/15 13

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Getting `ValueError: Field `volume_id' cannot be None`

I was able to narrow down to the scenario where it fails only when i do: ./run_tests.sh -N cinder.tests.unit.test_remotefs cinder.tests.unit.test_volume.VolumeTestCase and fails with: {0} cinder.tests.unit.test_volume.VolumeTestCase.test_can_delete_errored_snapshot [0.507361s] ... FAILED Capture

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [all] Liberty summit: Updates in Glance

On 3 June 2015 at 00:47, Fei Long Wang wrote: > On 02/06/15 01:51, Jay Pipes wrote: >> Please assign me as the CPL for Glance from Nova. > I'm happy to work with Jay for Nova from Glance :) I have added you both here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Inter-project_Liaisons P

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [all] Liberty summit: Updates in Glance

On 4 June 2015 at 09:51, John Garbutt wrote: > On 3 June 2015 at 00:47, Fei Long Wang wrote: >> On 02/06/15 01:51, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> Please assign me as the CPL for Glance from Nova. >> I'm happy to work with Jay for Nova from Glance :) > > I have added you both here: > https://wiki.openstack

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] How to deal with aborted image read?

On 03/06/15 16:46 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: We recently ran into an issue where nova couldn't write an image file due to lack of space and so just quit reading from glance. This caused glance to be stuck with an open file descriptor, which meant that the image consumed space even after it wa

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] [all] Liberty summit: Updates in Glance

On 1 June 2015 at 14:11, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 01/06/15 13:30 +0100, John Garbutt wrote: >> On 1 June 2015 at 13:10, Flavio Percoco wrote: >>> On 01/06/15 11:57 +0100, John Garbutt wrote: >>> I'm happy you brought this up. What are Nova's plans to adopt Glance's >>> v2 ? I heard there was a

Re: [openstack-dev] [global-requirements][pbr] tarball and git requirements no longer supported in requirements.txt

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/03/2015 11:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > Hi, right now there is a little used (e.g. its not in any active > project these days) previous feature of pbr/global-requirements: > we supported things that setuptools does not: to whit, tarball and

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] New micro-version needed for api bug fix or not?

2015-06-03 14:25 GMT+02:00 John Garbutt : > On 3 June 2015 at 12:52, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 06/03/2015 02:34 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: >>> >>> On 06/03/2015 12:16 AM, Jens Rosenboom wrote: >>> I'm wondering though whether the current API behaviour here should be changed more generally. Is

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [Nova] [Ironic] [Magnum] Microversion guideline in API-WG

Hi Alex, Based on my understanding, the Mangum code base is get from Ironic, that's why Magnum using http headers because when Magnum was created, Ironic is also using http headers. Perhaps Magnum can follow the way how Ironic move to use Microversion? Thanks. 2015-06-04 14:58 GMT+08:00 Xu, H

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] L3 agent rescheduling issue

Hi, neutrons! Some time ago I discovered a bug for l3 agent rescheduling [1]. When there are a lot of resources and agent_down_time is not big enough neutron-server starts marking l3 agents as dead. The same issue has been discovered and fixed for DHCP-agents. I proposed a change similar to those

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Does zonemanager support virtual fabric?

Hi, Many FC switchs have the function of virtual fabric and sometimes we need to manage the virtual fabric like create zone, delete zone etc. But it seems like that there is no virtual fabric support in our zonemanager. So can we manage virtual fabric with zonemaneger, if not, how to manage virt

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] New micro-version needed for api bug fix or not?

On 4 June 2015 at 10:40, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > 2015-06-03 14:25 GMT+02:00 John Garbutt : >> On 3 June 2015 at 12:52, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> On 06/03/2015 02:34 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 06/03/2015 12:16 AM, Jens Rosenboom wrote: > I'm wondering though whether the current API

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/03/2015 08:40 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: > As long as there's some way to get the *declarative* policy from the > system (as a data file or as an API call) that sounds fine. But I'm > dubious that it will be easy to keep the API call that returns the > declarative policy in sync with the actual

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][trove] Protected openstack resources

On 3 June 2015 at 20:51, Amrith Kumar wrote: > Several of us including Bruno Lago, Victoria Martinez de la Cruz (vkmc), > Flavio Percoco, Nikhil Manchanda (SlickNik), Vipul Sabhaya (vipul), Doug > Shelley (dougshelley66), and several others from the Trove team met in > Vancouver and were joined by

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] [nova] [oslo] [cross-project] Dynamic Policy

On 06/03/2015 08:46 PM, Hu, David J (Converged Cloud) wrote: > I am not a big fan of putting admins through a multi-step process. It looks > like admins will need to learn unified policy file first, then 1 or 2 or more > releases later, learn about policy in the db. I understand we are doing >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all]Big Tent Mode within respective projects

On 3 June 2015 at 13:39, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 06/03/2015 08:25 AM, Zhipeng Huang wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> As I understand, Neutron by far has the clearest big tent mode via its >> in-tree/out-of-tree decomposition, thanks to Kyle and other Neutron team >> members effort. >> >> So my question is

[openstack-dev] [nova] Scaling out Nova (and the code review process)

This was sent in another thread, but its a quick read out form one the Nova sessions at the summit that we might want a Nova specific discussion on... -- Forwarded message -- From: John Garbutt Date: 3 June 2015 at 17:57 Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][infra][tc][ptl] Scaling u

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Liberty Priorties for Nova

Hi, We had a great discussion at the summit around priorities: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-nova-liberty-priorities I have made a stab at writing that up here, please to review if you are interested: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187272/ Note we plan to keep focus on the reviews using

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Liberty Process, Deadlines and Dates for Nova

Hi, Following up from nova-meetings and this summit session: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-nova-liberty-process We agreed we follow the same deadlines as kilo, roughly. Importantly, we wanted to keep the blueprint freeze, and non-priority feature freeze process from kilo. This means we al

Re: [openstack-dev] [all]Big Tent Mode within respective projects

Jay, > At this time, Neutron is the only project that has done any splitting out > of driver and advanced services repos. Other projects have discussed doing > this, but, at least in Nova, that discussion was put on hold for the time > being. Last I remember, we agreed that we would clean up, sta

[openstack-dev] [Nova] Voting on the Nova project meeting times

Hi, We have a regular Nova project meeting with alternating times, as described here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova I will lean towards no change of the times, given we are used to them. But I want to double check there if there is a group of contributors we are accidentally exclu

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Liberty Priorties for Nova

Hi John, On 04/06/15 12:21, John Garbutt wrote: Hi, We had a great discussion at the summit around priorities: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-nova-liberty-priorities I have made a stab at writing that up here, please to review if you are interested: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/18727

[openstack-dev] novnc console connection timetout

Hi Guys, I am a newbie on openstack, I deployed my first openstack env via Fuel 6.0, but unfortunately I always could not access the vm's vnc console, it hints the connection time, I also found the following calltrace in nova-novncproxy.log, Could anybody give me a hint on it? I am not sure wheth

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] ENROLL state and changing node driver

Hi! While working on the enroll spec [1], I got a thinking: within the new state machine, when should we allow to change a node driver? My initial idea was to only allow driver change in ENROLL. Which sounds good to me, but then it will be impossible to change a driver after moving forward:

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][trove] Protected openstack resources

John, Thanks for your note. I've updated the review at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186357/ with answers to some of your questions (and I added you to that review). Trove's use-case like some of the other projects listed is different from Glance in that Trove has a guest agent. I've tried

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/03/2015 08:40 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: As long as there's some way to get the *declarative* policy from the system (as a data file or as an API call) that sounds fine. But I'm dubious that it will be easy to keep the API call that returns the decla

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][barbican] Regarding exposing X-Group-xxxx in token validation

Some kind of intermediate mapping might be better. With ldap, I dont have control over the groups users are assigned since thats an enterprise/AD thing. There can be a lot of them. Groups to Role relations I guess do that mapping. Though maybe passing groups directly when domains can have differ

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][barbican] Regarding exposing X-Group-xxxx in token validation

To clarify: we already have to include the groups produced as a result of federation mapping **in the payload** of Fernet tokens so that scoped tokens can be created later: https://github.com/openstack/keystone/blob/a637ebcbc4a92687d3e80a50cbe88df3b13c79e6/keystone/token/providers/fernet/token_fo

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

It's a been a week since I proposed this, with no objections. Welcome to the Neutron core reviewer team as the new QA Lieutenant Assaf! On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Maru Newby wrote: > +1 from me, long overdue! > > > > On May 28, 2015, at 9:42 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > > > Folks, I'd like

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

Hi Vahid, Your analysis is correct, and integration of heat-translator is as simple as you described that in your document. It would be really awesome if you would turn this PDF to the proper specification for the blueprint. P.S. Regarding several stack for applications - currently HOT-based pack

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Does zonemanager support virtual fabric?

Here's a cinder spec that proposes to add support for Brocade Virtual Fabrics support: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144389/ Cisco already has vSAN support. Thanks, Xing From: liuxinguo [mailto:liuxin...@huawei.com] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 6:02 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing Li

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Time to decide something on the vendor tools repo

Hi again! ~ half an hour has passed since my last email, and now I have one more question to discuss and decide! On the summit we were discussing things like chassis discovery, and arrived at rough conclusion that we want it to be somewhere in a separate repo. More precisely, we wanted some

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][barbican] Regarding exposing X-Group-xxxx in token validation

On 06/04/15 14:03, Fox, Kevin M wrote: Some kind of intermediate mapping might be better. With ldap, I dont have control over the groups users are assigned since thats an enterprise/AD thing. There can be a lot of them. Groups to Role relations I guess do that mapping. Though maybe passing grou

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 08:52 AM, Adam Young wrote: > On 06/04/2015 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 06/03/2015 08:40 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: >>> As long as there's some way to get the *declarative* policy from the >>> system (as a data file or as an API call) that sounds fine. But I'm >>> dubious that it

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][trove] Protected openstack resources

Excerpts from Amrith Kumar's message of 2015-06-04 12:46:37 +: > John, > > Thanks for your note. I've updated the review at > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/186357/ with answers to some of your > questions (and I added you to that review). > > Trove's use-case like some of the other proje

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

Thank you. We have a lot of work ahead of us :) - Original Message - > It's a been a week since I proposed this, with no objections. Welcome to the > Neutron core reviewer team as the new QA Lieutenant Assaf! > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Maru Newby < ma...@redhat.com > wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][barbican] Regarding exposing X-Group-xxxx in token validation

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > To clarify: we already have to include the groups produced as a result of > federation mapping **in the payload** of Fernet tokens so that scoped > tokens can be created later: > > > https://github.com/openstack/keystone/blob/a637ebcbc4a92687

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][reseller] New way to get a project scoped token by name

First I have some questions: if we are going to add a delimiter, how can we handle OpenStack API Stability guidelines [1]? If we add this delimiter in keystone.conf (and having the default value being "." or "/"), do we fall into the same API stability problems? Personally, I'm in favor of having

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] L3 agent rescheduling issue

Why don't we put the agent heartbeat into a separate greenthread on the agent so it continues to send updates even when it's busy processing changes? On Jun 4, 2015 2:56 AM, "Anna Kamyshnikova" wrote: > Hi, neutrons! > > Some time ago I discovered a bug for l3 agent rescheduling [1]. When there >

Re: [openstack-dev] Targeting icehouse-eol?

>>> The only open question I have is if we need to do an Icehouse point release >>> prior to the tag and dropping the branch, but I don't think that's happened >>> in the past with branch end of life - the eol tag basically serves as the >>> placeholder to the last 'release'. >> >> I don't think we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Time to decide something on the vendor tools repo

On 06/04/2015 09:29 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Hi again! > > ~ half an hour has passed since my last email, and now I have one more > question to discuss and decide! At this rate, we could match the [all] tag today. > > On the summit we were discussing things like chassis discovery, and > ar

[openstack-dev] Why do we drop branches? (WAS: Re: Targeting icehouse-eol?)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/04/2015 04:15 PM, Alan Pevec wrote: The only open question I have is if we need to do an Icehouse point release prior to the tag and dropping the branch, but I don't think that's happened in the past with branch end of life

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [Nova] [Ironic] [Magnum] Microversion guideline in API-WG

On 4 June 2015 at 02:58, Xu, Hejie wrote: > ... > And another guideline for when we should bump Mircoversion > *https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187896/* > > > This is timely because just this very minute I was going to send out email to the Ironic com

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][reseller] New way to get a project scoped token by name

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:10 AM Rodrigo Duarte wrote: > > Also, if we are going to use a delimiter, we need to update the way > projects names are returned in the GET v3/projects API to include the > hierarchy so the user (or client) knows how to request a token using the > project name. > This

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progress. There is an effort now to add microversion into the API-WG's guidelines, to provide a consistent way of using microversions across OpenStack projects [1]. Specifically, in the context of this email, there is a proposed

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progress. There is an effort now to add microversion into the API-WG's guidelines, to provide a consistent way of using microversions across OpenStack projects [1]. Specifically, in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas]Error at listener's barbican container validation

I think there may just be some non-updated docstrings here. We should take only the 'ref'. If we get a UUID we wont know how to build it or what to do with it. The naming of this does need to change, but I dont' believe we need to convert UUID to ref. Is 'self.get_cert_ref_url(cert_ref)​' some

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] L3 agent rescheduling issue

One reason for not sending the heartbeat from a separate greenthread could be that the agent is already doing it [1]. The current proposed patch addresses the issue blindly - that is to say before declaring an agent dead let's wait for some more time because it could be stuck doing stuff. In that c

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: >> Hi, >> >> In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a >> work-in-progress. There is an effort now to add microversion into the >> API-WG's guidelines, to provide a consistent way of using microv

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Time to decide something on the vendor tools repo

On 4 June 2015 at 09:29, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: On the summit we were discussing things like chassis discovery, and arrived > at rough conclusion that we want it to be somewhere in a separate repo. > More precisely, we wanted some place for vendor to contribute code (aka > scripts) that aren't goo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

Hi Ruby, Thanks for starting this thread, just like you I've been always confused about when and when not bump the microversioning of the API. > Backwards compatible API adds with no user signaling is a fallacy > because it assumes the arrow of time flows only one way. > > If at version 1.5 you h

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progress. There is an effort now to add microversion into the API-WG's guidelines, to provide a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

Hi Gosha, Sorry, not sure why my last message was delivered as "undefined". Anyways, thanks for pointing me to those materials. I have a feeling though that due to the nature of Heat-Translator we would need to deal with HOT based templates and not MuranoPL. Regards, ---

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

Congrats! Well deserved On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Assaf Muller wrote: > Thank you. > > We have a lot of work ahead of us :) > > > - Original Message - > > It's a been a week since I proposed this, with no objections. Welcome to > the > > Neutron core reviewer team as the new QA Lie

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 11:27 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 06/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progress. There is an effo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

+100 Great addition! Congratulations Assaf! On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:41 AM Miguel Lavalle wrote: > Congrats! Well deserved > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Assaf Muller wrote: > >> Thank you. >> >> We have a lot of work ahead of us :) >> >> >> - Original Message - >> > It's a been a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

Hi Serg,Sorry, I seem to be having issues sending messages to the mailing list.Thanks for your message. I can work on the blueprint spec. Just trying to get a good picture of related Murano processes and where the connection points to Heat-Translator should be.And I agreed with your comment on Mura

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 11:27 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 06/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progress. There is an effo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Getting `ValueError: Field `volume_id' cannot be None`

The problem is in your test case. There is no such methods as "remotefs.db.snapshot_get" or "remotefs.db.snapshot_admin_metadata_get". You need to use "with mock.patch('cinder.db.snapshot_get') as snapshot_get, mock.patch('cinder.db.snapshot_admin_metadata_get') as snapshot_admin_metadata_get". T

[openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

Hi Serg, Sorry, I seem to be having issues sending messages to the mailing list. Thanks for your message. I can work on the blueprint spec. Just trying to get a good picture of related Murano processes and where the connection points to Heat-Translator should be. And I agreed with your comment

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

Congratulations Assaf!! On 4 June 2015 at 17:45, Paul Michali wrote: > +100 Great addition! Congratulations Assaf! > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:41 AM Miguel Lavalle > wrote: > >> Congrats! Well deserved >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Assaf Muller wrote: >> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> We hav

Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Help needed with TOSCA support in Murano

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On 06/04/2015 05:43 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/04/2015 11:27 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: On 06/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: Hi, In Kilo, we introduced microversions but it seems to be a work-in-progre

[openstack-dev] Which middleware does keystone use for authentication and authorization?

Hi all, Does any one know which middleware does Openstack use to authenticate users in Keystone in Kilo release? I saw two middleware, one is in Keystone client, the other is an independent directory. I know the previous version, the middleware in keystone client is used, but in Kilo, I am not su

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [Nova] [Ironic] [Magnum] Microversion guideline in API-WG

On Jun 4, 2015 12:00 AM, "Xu, Hejie" wrote: > > Hi, guys, > > I’m working on adding Microversion into the API-WG’s guideline which make sure we have consistent Microversion behavior in the API for user. > The Nova and Ironic already have Microversion implementation, and as I know Magnum https://re

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

Congratulations Assaf ☺ From: Jaume Devesa [mailto:devv...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 9:25 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team Congratulations Assaf!!

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

Inline. On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/04/2015 08:52 AM, Adam Young wrote: > > On 06/04/2015 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 06/03/2015 08:40 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: > >>> As long as there's some way to get the *declarative* policy from the > >>> system (as a data

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

On Jun 4, 2015 8:57 AM, "Monty Taylor" wrote: > > On 06/04/2015 11:27 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > > On 06/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 06/04/2015 10:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > >>> On 06/04/2015 04:40 PM, Ruby Loo wrote: > Hi, > > In Kilo, we introduced microversio

Re: [openstack-dev] Why do we drop branches? (WAS: Re: Targeting icehouse-eol?)

On 2015-06-04 16:23:12 +0200 (+0200), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Why do we even drop stable branches? If anything, it introduces > unneeded problems to those who have their scripts/cookbooks set to > chase those branches. They would need to switch to eol tag. Why not > just leaving them sitting there

Re: [openstack-dev] Which middleware does keystone use for authentication and authorization?

You are referring to keystonemiddleware ( https://github.com/openstack/keystonemiddleware) - the Keystone team switched over many OpenStack services to use this new library in Kilo. It was originally a copy of the code in keystoneclient, the driving factor for the change was to decouple the midd

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] ENROLL state and changing node driver

On Jun 4, 2015 5:53 AM, "Dmitry Tantsur" wrote: > > Hi! > > While working on the enroll spec [1], I got a thinking: within the new state machine, when should we allow to change a node driver? > > My initial idea was to only allow driver change in ENROLL. Which sounds good to me, but then it will b

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

Congrats Assaf ;) On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Somanchi Trinath < trinath.soman...@freescale.com> wrote: > Congratulations Assaf J > > > > > > > > *From:* Jaume Devesa [mailto:devv...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2015 9:25 PM > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usag

[openstack-dev] [infra][third-party] Common-CI Virtual Sprint

Hi, It was nice to meet many of you at the Vancouver Infra Working Session. Quite a bit of progress was made finding owners for some of the common-ci refactoring work [1] and puppet testing work. A few patches were proposed, reviewed, and some merged! As we continue the effort over the coming

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] L3 agent rescheduling issue

Is there a way to parallelize the period tasks? I wanted to go this route because I encountered cases where a bunch of routers would get scheduled to l3 agents and they would all hit the server nearly simultaneously with a sync routers task. This could result in thousands of routers and their floa

Re: [openstack-dev] Why do we drop branches? (WAS: Re: Targeting icehouse-eol?)

argh BLOCK push on others stable branches [access "refs/heads/stable/*"] push = block group "Anonymous Users" On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:34 PM, ZZelle wrote: > We can do the opposite to avoid more and more ACLs: > > ALLOW push on some specific stable branches > > [access "refs/heads/stable/

[openstack-dev] [puppet] "stubs" considered harmful in spec tests

Summary - In puppet module spec tests, do not use "stubs", which means the method will be called 0 or more times. Instead, use "expects", which means the method must be called exactly 1 time, or some other more fine grained expectation method stubber. Our puppet unit tests mostly use rspec, b

Re: [openstack-dev] Why do we drop branches? (WAS: Re: Targeting icehouse-eol?)

We can do the opposite to avoid more and more ACLs: ALLOW push on some specific stable branches [access "refs/heads/stable/kilo"] push = allow group ***-stable-maint [access "refs/heads/stable/juno"] push = allow group ***-stable-maint BLOCK push on others stable branches [access "refs/he

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 09:40 AM, Sean Dague wrote: Is there some secret dragon I'm missing here? > >No. But it is a significant bit of coding to do; you would need to >crawl every API and make sure you hit every code path that could enforce >policy. Um, I don't understand that. I'm saying that you'd

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 12:12 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: > Inline. > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Sean Dague > wrote: > > On 06/04/2015 08:52 AM, Adam Young wrote: > > On 06/04/2015 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 06/03/2015 08:40 PM, Tim Hinrichs wrote: > >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] When to bump the microversion?

So we should have told the folks to so developing agent? (Not sure why you all think I'm talking about us) Maybe. But anyway anyone deliberately ignores my points, so I'm done with this discussion. 04 июня 2015 г. 18:17 пользователь "Devananda van der Veen" < devananda@gmail.com> написал: > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [global-requirements][pbr] tarball and git requirements no longer supported in requirements.txt

+1. I had setup a CI for a third-party plugin and the easiest thing to do to make sure it was running tests with the latest copy of the corresponding neutron branch was to put the git URL in requirements.txt. We wanted to always test the latest code so we had early detection of failures. What's th

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 09:40 AM, Sean Dague wrote: So I feel like I understand the high level dynamic policy end game. I feel like what I'm proposing for policy engine with encoded defaults doesn't negatively impact that. I feel there is a middle chunk where perhaps we've got different concerns or differe

[openstack-dev] [fuel] bp updates & spec maintenance

Since the meeting was closed prior to having a discussion for this topic, I will post my notes here as well. I will start updating some of the BP's that have landed in 6.1 to reflect their current status There are a number of specs open for BP's that have code landed. We will merge the current re

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

On 06/04/2015 01:03 PM, Adam Young wrote: > On 06/04/2015 09:40 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> So I feel like I understand the high level dynamic policy end game. I >> feel like what I'm proposing for policy engine with encoded defaults >> doesn't negatively impact that. I feel there is a middle chunk wh

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] L3 agent rescheduling issue

- Original Message - > One reason for not sending the heartbeat from a separate greenthread could be > that the agent is already doing it [1]. > The current proposed patch addresses the issue blindly - that is to say > before declaring an agent dead let's wait for some more time because i

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] How to deal with aborted image read?

On 06/04/2015 03:01 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 03/06/15 16:46 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: We recently ran into an issue where nova couldn't write an image file due to lack of space and so just quit reading from glance. This caused glance to be stuck with an open file descriptor, which meant t

Re: [openstack-dev] Dynamic Policy for Access Control Subteam Meeting

I am confused about the goal. Are we saying we should allow operators to modify the access policies but then warn them if they do? But if operators *intend* to modify the policies in order to fit their compliance/security needs, which is likely the case, aren't the warning messages confusing and

[openstack-dev] [magnum][horizon] Making a dashboard for Magnum - need a vote from the core team

Hey folks, I think it is critical for self-service needs that we have a Horizon dashboard to represent Magnum. I know the entire Magnum team has no experience in UI development, but I have found atleast one volunteer Bradley Jones to tackle the work. I am looking for more volunteers to tackle

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][horizon] Making a dashboard for Magnum - need a vote from the core team

My vote is +1 for a unified core team for all Magnum development which in the future will include the magnum-ui repo, the python-magnumclient repo, the magnum repo, and the python-k8sclient repo. Regards -steve From: Steven Dake mailto:std...@cisco.com>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing

  1   2   >