Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] The Weekly Owl - 25th Edition

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:06 PM Jill Rouleau wrote: > On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 07:38 -0400, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 2:17 PM Jill Rouleau wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 11:35 -0400, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > > > > > &

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] FFE request for QDR integration in TripleO (Was: Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI)

Hi Alex: Can you consider this our FFE for the QDR patches. Its mainly blocked on CI issues. Half the patches for QDR integration are already merged. The other 3 referenced need to get merged once CI passes. Please consider this out formal request for FFE for QDR integration in tripleo. Cheers,

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] The Weekly Owl - 25th Edition

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 2:17 PM Jill Rouleau wrote: > On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 11:35 -0400, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:42 AM Alex Schultz > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:32 AM, Martin Magr > > > wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] The Weekly Owl - 25th Edition

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:42 AM Alex Schultz wrote: > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:32 AM, Martin Magr wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:12 PM, Emilien Macchi > wrote: > >> > >> Your fellow reporter took a break from writing, but is now back on his > >> pen. > >> > >> Welcome to the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Proposing Bogdan Dobrelya core on TripleO / Containers

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Brent Eagles wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Bogdan (bogdando on IRC) has been very active in Containerization of >> TripleO and his quality of review has increased over

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] decreased coverage for telemetry

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Wesley Hayutin <whayu...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Pradeep Kilambi <p...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] decreased coverage for telemetry

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > Greetings, > > I was looking through the mailing list and I did not see any emails > explicitly calling out the decreased coverage for telemetry in tripleo due > to [1]. A series of changes went into the CI system to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] proposing Alex Schultz tripleo-core in all projects

+1 to Alex On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Juan Antonio Osorio wrote: > +1 > > He's a great reviewer > > On 7 Jul 2017 8:40 pm, "Emilien Macchi" wrote: >> >> Alex has demonstrated high technical and community skills in TripleO - >> where he's already

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] PTG + Release status

Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 25, 2017, at 11:14 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> Before leaving in week-end, I thought useful to share some infos with the >> team. >> >> First of all, it was

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] remaining ocata items

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:52 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > > > > On 24/01/17 11:53 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > >> Yes, even outside TripleO, it's already hard to follow all changes > >> made in projects,

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Move redis out of Pacemaker

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Michele Baldessari <mich...@acksyn.org> wrote: > Hi Pradeep, > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:51:59PM +0100, Giulio Fidente wrote: > > On 12/09/2016 04:49 PM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > > >I would like to get some thoughts on

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Move redis out of Pacemaker

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Giulio Fidente <gfide...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 12/12/2016 02:51 PM, Giulio Fidente wrote: > >> On 12/09/2016 04:49 PM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: >> >>> Hey Folks: >>> >>> I would like to get some thoughts

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Move redis out of Pacemaker

Hey Folks: I would like to get some thoughts on $Subject. This came up when i was discussing the standalone roles for telemetry. Currently when we deploy redis in tripleo, its a pacemaker managed service. So if we were to deploy telemetry services on a dedicated node we could. But redis will have

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Proposing Alex Schultz core on puppet-tripleo

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:26 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > Team, > > Alex Schultz (mwhahaha on IRC) has been active on TripleO since a few > months now. While he's very active in different areas of TripleO, his > reviews and contributions on puppet-tripleo have been very

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] proposing Michele Baldessari part of core team

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > MIchele Baldessari (bandini on IRC) has consistently demonstrated high > levels of contributions in TripleO projects, specifically in High > Availability area where's he's for us a guru (I still don't understand > how

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Default the HA scenario to Ceph

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Giulio Fidente > wrote: > > hi, > > > > we introduced support for the deployment of Ceph in the liberty release > so > > that it could optionally be

[openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] Request to allow ceilometerclient 2.6.1 in upper-constraints for newton

Hi, This is FFE request to get ceilometerclient 2.6.1 into upper constraints. There is already a patch for this blocked by freeze[1]. ceilometerclient 2.6.1 was cut 3 days after the freeze looks like and it includes various critical fixes such as[2]. Without this aodh logs fill up with following

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Aodh upgrades - Request backport exception for stable/liberty

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 1:31 PM, James Slagle <james.sla...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Pradeep Kilambi <p...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Thanks Steve. I was under the impression we cannot run puppet at this > > stage. Hence my suggestion to r

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Aodh upgrades - Request backport exception for stable/liberty

ck-dev/2016-May/094440.html > > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 03:33:29PM -0400, James Slagle wrote: >> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Pradeep Kilambi <p...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > Hi Everyone: >> > >> > I wanted to start a discussion around considerin

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Aodh upgrades - Request backport exception for stable/liberty

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:33 PM, James Slagle <james.sla...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Pradeep Kilambi <p...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi Everyone: > > > > I wanted to start a discussion around considering backporting Aodh to > > st

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Aodh upgrades - Request backport exception for stable/liberty

ons things work the way they > do today, but I also want to be on record that this is a problem to be > solved, not a precedent to be followed in the future. > > Thanks, ~ Prad > On 05/16/2016 09:34 AM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > > Hi Everyone: > > > > I wanted to start a discuss

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Aodh upgrades - Request backport exception for stable/liberty

Hi Everyone: I wanted to start a discussion around considering backporting Aodh to stable/liberty for upgrades. We have been discussing quite a bit on whats the best way for our users to upgrade ceilometer alarms to Aodh when moving from liberty to mitaka. A quick refresh on what changed, In

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] gnocchi backport exception for stable/mitaka

Hi Everyone: As Mitaka branch was cut yesterday, I would like to request a backport exception to get gnocchi patches[1][2][3] into stable/mitaka. It should low risk feature as we decided not to set ceilometer to use gnocchi by default. So ceilometer would work as is and gnocchi is deployed along

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Including Aodh and Gnocchi in Mitaka

Hey Guys: As many of you know, we have been working on getting Aodh and Gnocchi support into TripleO. We would like to formally request these two be made blockers to get into Mitaka release for TripleO. We tried to get these into Liberty, but due to time constraints it seems slim that that would

Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] ceilometer Floatingip Pollster change

y at a later time when nova api gives the expected fip data, so we can poll nova/neutron api's when available. For now, I feel we should go ahead with the proposed implementation[1]. Any objections? [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269369/ ~ Pradeep > > > On 19/01/

[openstack-dev] [ceilometer] ceilometer Floatingip Pollster change

Ceilometer floatingip pollster currently polls the nova api to get the floating ip info periodically. But due to limitations in the nova api as listed in this bug[1], the data ceilometer receives isn't all that useful. Nova doesn't return this info for all tenants. There has been some work in juno

Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer] proposal to add Pradeep Kilambi to Ceilometer core

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 12:42 PM, gord chung <g...@live.ca> wrote: > > > On 31/08/15 09:13 AM, gord chung wrote: > >> hi, >> >> we'd like to nominate Pradeep Kilambi to the Ceilometer core team. he has >> contributed by adding declarative meter support in

Re: [openstack-dev] [rally] [Ceilometer] profiler sample resource id

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Roman Vasilets rvasil...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi, Could you provide the link to this code? Here it is: https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/blob/master/ceilometer/profiler/notifications.py#L76 On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Pradeep Kilambi pkila

[openstack-dev] [rally] [Ceilometer] profiler sample resource id

assume there is no objection to dropping this prefix. Thanks, -- -- Pradeep Kilambi; irc: prad OpenStack Engineering __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ

[openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Liberty Mid Cycle Virtual Meetup

Hi everyone, In this week's Ceilometer IRC meeting, we took a vote[1] and decide that we will have a *virtual* mid-cycle meetup for Liberty cycle. To figure out the convenient dates we created a doodle[2]. Please take a vote at your earliest, so we can settle on a date and get the rest of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Incubator concerns from packaging perspective

On 8/26/14, 4:49 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote: On Aug 25, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Pradeep Kilambi (pkilambi) pkila...@cisco.com wrote: On 8/23/14, 5:36 PM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote: On Aug 23, 2014, at 4:06 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Incubator concerns from packaging perspective

On 8/23/14, 5:36 PM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote: On Aug 23, 2014, at 4:06 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com wrote: