[openstack-dev] [all][i18n] translation import: No more pot files in git trees
Instead of storing the generated source translation files
(*/locale/*.pot) in git and proposing them as part of the translation
import, we publish these files now whenever we push to the translation
server also to http://tarballs.openstack.org/translation-source/
Therefore, the source files are not needed in the git repositories
anymore, the proposal bot will now - when it proposes translations -
remove existing pot files.
This will reduce the size of the imports significantly.
Please import the translations with these removed pot files:
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+topic:zanata/translations,n,z
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
__
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][osc] Austin Design summit summary on the future of Neutron client
Akihiro Motoki wrote on 05/06/2016 08:20:45 PM: > From: Akihiro Motoki > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List > Date: 05/06/2016 08:23 PM > Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron][osc] Austin Design summit summary > on the future of Neutron client > > n Austin we had a session on the future of neutron client and > discussed the CLI transition to OpenStack Client (OSC). > The session etherpad is found at [1]. > > * We checked the progress of OSC transition and it is good. > Support of 11 resources which are targets of the initial effort. > In Newton cycle, we will focus on achieving the feature parity to > the existing 'neutron' CLI. > > * We agreed that OSC support for neutron advanced services will be > done via OSC plugin. > BGP stuff (neutron-dynamic-routing) will be supported via OSC > plugin as well. > neutron-dynamic-routing needs to be added to the list at [2]. Thanks for the summary Akihiro. Here's the patch set to add BGP: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/313865/ > Future official sub projects (possibly like sfc, l2gw) will be > handled in the same way. > > * CLI support for new features should be implemented in OpenStack > Client (and openstacksdk). > All should go to OSC. neutronclient CLI support is optional. > Around the feature freeze, neutron and openstackclient team will > communicate more closely to coordinate a new release. > > * python bindings in neutronclient: > All features provided by the main neutron repo will be supported by > openstackclient and openstacksdk. > python bindings in the python-neutronclient need to be added only if > an openstack service needs to use the bindings. > (for example, get-me-a-network python binding is required by nova.) > > * A discussion about where is an appropriate place for admin commands, > OSC repo vs OSC plugin in the python-neutronclient repo. > If admin commands are provided by OSC plugin, it will reduce the > number of commands that regular users will see. > On the other hand, API permissions can be configured by the policy. > One option is to install the OSC plugin > which provides admin commands if users want to use them. > In my understanding, there is no actual consensus in the session. > (Note that the similar discussion happend for nova OSC support in > the dev list after the summit. [3]) > > Thanks, > Akihiro > > [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-neutron-future-neutron-client > [2] https://github.com/openstack/python-neutronclient/blob/master/ > doc/source/devref/transition_to_osc.rst#developer-guide > [3] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-May/093955.html > > __ > 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 > __ 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
[openstack-dev] [kolla] CentOS binary and source gate failed due to the rabbitmq
Recently, the centos binary and source gate failed due to the rabbitmq container existed. After making some debug. I do not found the root cause. does anyone has any idea for this? see this PS gate result[0] centos binary gate failed[1] CentOS source gate failed[2] [0] https://review.openstack.org/313838 [1] http://logs.openstack.org/38/313838/1/check/gate-kolla-dsvm-deploy-centos-binary/ea293fe/ [2] http://logs.openstack.org/38/313838/1/check/gate-kolla-dsvm-deploy-centos-source/d4cb127/ -- Regards, Jeffrey Zhang Blog: http://xcodest.me __ 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
[openstack-dev] [requirements] Bootstrapping new team for Requirements.
Dirk, Haïkel, Igor, Alan, Tony, Ghe, Please see brain dump here - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/requirements-tasks Looking at time overlap, it seems that most of you are in one time range and Tony and I are outliers http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?iso=20160506&p1=43&p2=240&p3=195&p4=166&p5=83&p6=281&p7=141) So one choice for time is 7:00 AM or 8:00 AM my time which will be 9:00/10:00 PM for Tony. Are there other options that anyone sees? Please let me know which days work as well. dhellmann, sdague, markmcclain, ttx, lifeless, Since you are on the current requirements-core gerrit group, Can you please review the etherpad and add your thoughts/ideas/pointers to transfer knowledge to the new folks? To be clear, we are not yet adding new folks to the gerrit group, At the moment, i am just getting everyone familiar and productive with what we do now and see who is still around doing stuff in a couple of months :) Anyone else want to help, Jump in please! Thanks, Dims -- Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims __ 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] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016
Hi Matt, I'm open to discuss what would be the best way forward in this topic. First of all I would like to understand the intention with document structures long term to see how we can have a scalable and maintainable process. My experience is that keeping the documentation up to date separately from the code can be difficult that results in outdated materials, which also leads to bad user experience and impression. Would this topic be sufficient for one of the team meetings? Thanks and Best Regards, Ildikó > -Original Message- > From: Matt Kassawara [mailto:mkassaw...@gmail.com] > Sent: May 07, 2016 00:55 > To: Ildikó Váncsa > Cc: Lana Brindley; enstack.org; OpenStack Development Mailing List; > openstack-i...@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016 > > One significant advantage of central documentation involves providing content > in a single location with consistent structure or format > that best serves the particular audience. Moving most or all documentation > into project trees essentially eliminates this advantage, > leaving our audiences with an impression that OpenStack consists of many > loosely associated projects rather than a coherent cloud > computing solution. However, as a contributor to a few other OpenStack > projects who helps other developers contribute to central > documentation, I can understand some of the frustrations with it. I prefer to > resolve these frustrations and have some ideas that I > intend to float in separate thread, but if you don't think that's possible, > consider submitting a spec to change the primary purpose of > the central documentation team to simply managing links to content in the > project trees. > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Ildikó Váncsa > wrote: > > > Hi Lana, > > Thanks for the summary, it's pretty good reading to catch up what > happened recently. > > I have one question, I might missed a few entries, so please point me > to the right document in this case. We had a > docco session with the Telemetry team and we agreed on moving back the > documentation snippets, like for instance the Install > Guide, to the project trees is a really good step and we're very supportive. > In this sense I would like to ask about the plans regarding > the Admin guide. We have a chapter there, which is on one hand outdated and > on the other hand would be better to move under the > project trees as well. Is this plan/desire in line with your plans regarding > that document? > > Thanks, > /Ildikó > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Lana Brindley [mailto:openst...@lanabrindley.com] > > Sent: May 06, 2016 08:13 > > To: enstack.org; OpenStack Development Mailing List; > openstack-i...@lists.openstack.org > > Subject: What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016 > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I hope you all had a safe journey home from Summit, and are now fully > recovered from all the excitement (and > jetlag)! I'm really > > pleased with the amount of progress we made this time around. We have > a definitive set of goals for Newton, and I'm > confident that > > they're all moving us towards a much better docs suite overall. Of > course, the biggest and most important work we > have to do is to get > > our Install Guide changes underway. I'm very excited to see the new > method for documenting OpenStack installation, > and can't wait > > to see all our big tent projects contributing to docs in such a > meaningful way. Thank you to everyone (in the room and > online) who > > contributed to the Install Guide discussion, and helped us move > forward on this important project. > > > > In other news, I've written a wrapup of the Austin design summit on > my blog, which you might be interested in: > > > http://lanabrindley.com/2016/05/05/openstack-newton-summit-docs-wrapup/ > > > > == Progress towards Newton == > > > > 152 days to go! > > > > Bugs closed so far: 61 > > > > Because we have such a specific set of deliverables carved out for > Newton, I've made them their own wiki page: > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/NewtonDeliverables > > Feel free to add more detail and cross things off as they are > achieved throughout the release. I will also do my best to > ensure it's kept > > up to date for each newsletter. > > > > One of the first tasks we've started work on after Summit is moving > the Ops and HA Guides out of their own > repositories and into > > openstack-manuals. As a result, those repositories are now frozen, > and any work you want to do on those books > should be in > > openstack-manuals. > > > > We are almost ready to publish the new RST version of the Ops Guide, > there's just a few cleanup edits going in now, > so make sure you
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016
On 05/07/2016 06:09 PM, Ildikó Váncsa wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I'm open to discuss what would be the best way forward in this topic. First
> of all I would like to understand the intention with document structures long
> term to see how we can have a scalable and maintainable process.
>
> My experience is that keeping the documentation up to date separately from
> the code can be difficult that results in outdated materials, which also
> leads to bad user experience and impression.
>
> Would this topic be sufficient for one of the team meetings?
Right now we have the Install Guide as first guide where we move content
to the teams and still want to provide this from one place.
I suggest that we do the Install Guide first and then consider whether
that is a model that we should use for other documents as well,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
__
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
[openstack-dev] [glance] [all] On recognizing glance-cores
Hi all, I've been wanting to recognize the efforts of glance-cores for a while and send this & alike emails for a while. Found a good time to do so. Currently, there are 12 (human) core reviewers in the Glance program (same for all concerned repos) and they have been providing excellent input to the project. Each individual has a different personality and in this email I wanted to give them virtual badges for the kind of input (I think) they have been providing. May be this email can also be useful to those who want specific type of input on their patches/review but isn't intended for that purpose (a good side effect nonetheless). Be mindful that not everyone is dedicated to just the Glance program. And, this email isn't about the individual's assignments or their time share to Glance Here we go on the badges (in Lexicographical order):- * Brian Rosmaita : "Pro" -- his reviews are detailed, gives a diverse perspective of the domain & cross-domains, gives technical, product and operational perspective and in a very professional tone. Title can't be any less :-) * Erno Kuvaja : "The dependable" -- always clear cut in his review and stance, keeps an eye on the review pipe, pushes things through if others are stuck. You can rely on him to get reviews done. :-) * Fei Long Wang : "The tenacious" -- works in not necessarily a convenient time zone relative to the majority team, in way completes our 24 hours cycle for those needing reviews at those hours, picks up reviews for important work if stuck or to help rookies. Doesn't give up on things and keep fighting to stay sync with the team. :-) * Flavio Percoco : "The fireball" -- very enthusiastic, isn't afraid to sign up for more work, keeps activity up. Also has a unique perspective on things. You can rely on giving him complicated things to see them through if others are stuck arguing. :-) * Glance Bot : "Skynet" -- do I need to say more? :-) * Hemanth Makkapati : "The astute" -- always comprehensive in his reviews, attempts a full body scan of the patch, gives his fullest to test things on developer or staging environments. Sometimes plays devil's advocate and keep people on check. :-) * Ian Cordasco : "The pundit" -- has a abode of knowledge when it comes to python, OpenStack, Open Source, etc. You can expect honest critical reviews from him while keeping them at a temparate practicality level. You can expect your perspective refresher after his review. :-) * Kairat Kushaev : "The scintillating" -- involves himself all round the project, gives meticulous reviews and keeps things moving. A recent addition to the team yet very effective developer and a core. You can expect reviews of all types from this guy. :-) * Louis Taylor : "The zealot" -- extremely enthusiastic, very fast moving and a brilliant hacker. He can get things done for you in short time including reviews. He has involved himself in different parts of Glance and related projects. :-) * Mike Fedosin : "The sage" -- smart, practical and wise in his code and reviews; finds the most unique and important bugs and solutions. Has a good understanding of the project constructs and direction. You can expect some shower of wisdom. :-) * Nikhil Komawar : "The router" -- going to be the postman for newton. you need to watch out for pings, emails and 'heads-ups'. :-) * Sabari : "The counselor" -- will make sure you and reviews are on the right track, he can give you advice for both the spectrum. Expect to find yourself coming to practical terms after his reviews. :-) * Stuart McLaren : "The virtuoso" -- gives a detailed explanation of the involved dimensions in his review and code; will always make you aware of the usefulness and pain points of the proposals. You shouldn't be optimistic of your code being secure unless you have his +1 to the bare minimum. :-) As a consequence you can find how the Glance team complements each other with their ways of working. If you get input from 3-4 of different cores per review, I'm confident that the patches will be rock solid. However, that's not practical and I do not want to encourage that on everyday basis. It is merely an observation to share the best of things with the wider community. Hope you enjoyed it! Cheers -- Thanks, Nikhil __ 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] [all][i18n] [config] translation import: No more pot files in git trees
Hi Andreas, Thank you for your email. I got input from a helpful soul that the generated sample configs should also be moved to somewhere publishable? Is that effort in progress as well and any links to share (if so)? On 5/7/16 4:45 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Instead of storing the generated source translation files > (*/locale/*.pot) in git and proposing them as part of the translation > import, we publish these files now whenever we push to the translation > server also to http://tarballs.openstack.org/translation-source/ > > Therefore, the source files are not needed in the git repositories > anymore, the proposal bot will now - when it proposes translations - > remove existing pot files. > > This will reduce the size of the imports significantly. > > Please import the translations with these removed pot files: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+topic:zanata/translations,n,z > > Andreas > > -- Thanks, Nikhil __ 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] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Jaeger [mailto:a...@suse.com]
> Sent: May 07, 2016 20:51
> To: Ildikó Váncsa; 'Matt Kassawara'
> Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List; enstack.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016
>
> On 05/07/2016 06:09 PM, Ildikó Váncsa wrote:
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > I'm open to discuss what would be the best way forward in this topic. First
> > of all I would like to understand the intention with
> document structures long term to see how we can have a scalable and
> maintainable process.
> >
> > My experience is that keeping the documentation up to date separately from
> > the code can be difficult that results in outdated
> materials, which also leads to bad user experience and impression.
> >
> > Would this topic be sufficient for one of the team meetings?
>
> Right now we have the Install Guide as first guide where we move content to
> the teams and still want to provide this from one place.
>
> I suggest that we do the Install Guide first and then consider whether that
> is a model that we should use for other documents as well,
Ok, that sounds good. Thanks Andreas for clarifying.
Best Regards,
Ildikó
>
> Andreas
> --
> Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
> SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
>GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
>HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
> GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
__
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] [all][i18n] [config] translation import: No more pot files in git trees
On 05/07/2016 10:06 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Thank you for your email.
>
> I got input from a helpful soul that the generated sample configs should
> also be moved to somewhere publishable? Is that effort in progress as
> well and any links to share (if so)?
Nikhil,
look at the jobs defined in
https://review.openstack.org/309560 (and refined with updates). You can
do the same: Generate the file and then publish with the scp plug-in to
a well-know place like tarballs.openstack.org/sample-configs/glance/master
Feel free to catch me on #openstack-infra if you have questions - or
provide a first change and then let's work on it together...
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
__
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] [OpenStack-docs] What's Up, Doc? 6 May 2016
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> On 05/07/2016 06:09 PM, Ildikó Váncsa wrote:
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > I'm open to discuss what would be the best way forward in this topic.
> First of all I would like to understand the intention with document
> structures long term to see how we can have a scalable and maintainable
> process.
> >
> > My experience is that keeping the documentation up to date separately
> from the code can be difficult that results in outdated materials, which
> also leads to bad user experience and impression.
> >
> > Would this topic be sufficient for one of the team meetings?
>
> Right now we have the Install Guide as first guide where we move content
> to the teams and still want to provide this from one place.
>
> I suggest that we do the Install Guide first and then consider whether
> that is a model that we should use for other documents as well,
>
Another example model to keep an eye on is the current move of content from
api-site to project repos. Let's see how that goes as well --
quality/accuracy, usefulness, and ongoing maintenance as first goals.
Anne
>
> Andreas
> --
> Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
> SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
>GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
>HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
> GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
>
>
> ___
> OpenStack-docs mailing list
> openstack-d...@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>
--
Anne Gentle
www.justwriteclick.com
__
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] [all][i18n] [config] translation import: No more pot files in git trees
On 5/7/16 4:26 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 05/07/2016 10:06 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> Thank you for your email. >> >> I got input from a helpful soul that the generated sample configs should >> also be moved to somewhere publishable? Is that effort in progress as >> well and any links to share (if so)? > Nikhil, > > look at the jobs defined in > https://review.openstack.org/309560 (and refined with updates). You can > do the same: Generate the file and then publish with the scp plug-in to > a well-know place like tarballs.openstack.org/sample-configs/glance/master > > Feel free to catch me on #openstack-infra if you have questions - or > provide a first change and then let's work on it together... Much appreciated! > > Andreas > > -- Thanks, Nikhil __ 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] cross-OpenStack L2 Networking spec review
Hi Team, We are trying to describe specification [1] regarding to ""cross OpenStack L2 networking"" [0] as Chaoyi mentioned in previous message. Honestly that description [0] does not accurately describe what this project is trying to do. And it's hard to be described by few words as well. And he mentioned having a quick look at presentation material. [2] This is fine to understand this project. But it's still not good enough. AFAK it's because that those kind of materials are completely based on our blueprint. [3]. IMHO I would recommend you to start from that blurprint. At least from: 7. Stateless Architecture Proposal If some sentences are not based on that blueprint, that's a problem. But even you read that blueprint, you do not really understand what this project is trying to do. This is a real problem. We have to fix a blueprint first. Otherwise we face double-writes issue which could cause huge risk to this project. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304540/ [2] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UQWeAMIJgJsWw-cyz9R7NvcAuSWUnKvaZFXLfRAQ6fI/edit [3] https://docs.google.com/document/d/18kZZ1snMOCD9IQvUKI5NVDzSASpw-QKj7l2zNqMEd3g/edit# If I've been missing anything, please point it out to me. Cheers, Shinobu On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Shinobu Kinjo wrote: > Hi Joe, > > Thank you for your message. > I've CCed dev list since we are still seeking more awesome > contributors to accelerate and improve this project. > And I believe that this topic you wrote up in your previous message is > one of interesting topics. > > Cheers, > Shinobu > > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 6:29 PM, joehuang wrote: >> Hello, >> >> As discussed with Xiongqiu and Ronghui, the spec will be written co-author >> with Zhiyuan and I. So please review the spec after new patch updated. >> >> And for Feng Pan, he has deep knowledge in OpenStack and networking, and we >> met in Austin OpenStack summit, he is pleased to join the review. >> >> For Pan has not attended the initial cross OpenStack L2 networking >> discussion, the etherpad will be good to learn the background: >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/TricircleCrossPodL2Networking >> >> And this slides will help to learn Tricircle quickly: >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UQWeAMIJgJsWw-cyz9R7NvcAuSWUnKvaZFXLfRAQ6fI/edit >> >> Best Regards >> Chaoyi Huang ( Joe Huang ) >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: XiongQiu Long (Code Review) [mailto:rev...@openstack.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 9:08 PM >> To: Zhiyuan Cai; Shinobu KINJO; Liuhaixia; joehuang; lige; Ronghui Cao >> Cc: Shinobu Kinjo; Khayam Gondal; tangzhuo; Yipei Niu; shiyangkai >> Subject: Change in openstack/tricircle[master]: Add cross-pod L2 Networking >> spec file >> >> Hello Zhiyuan Cai, Shinobu KINJO, Jenkins, liuhaixia, Chaoyi Huang, lige, >> Ronghui Cao, >> >> I'd like you to reexamine a change. Please visit >> >> https://review.openstack.org/304540 >> >> to look at the new patch set (#4). >> >> Change subject: Add cross-pod L2 Networking spec file >> .. >> >> Add cross-pod L2 Networking spec file >> >> Change-Id: I616048c13d03f48aa16d9ff48572b0d5a49d6fb4 >> --- >> A specs/cross-pod-l2-networking.rst >> 1 file changed, 263 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> >> git pull ssh://review.openstack.org:29418/openstack/tricircle >> refs/changes/40/304540/4 >> -- >> To view, visit https://review.openstack.org/304540 >> To unsubscribe, visit https://review.openstack.org/settings >> >> Gerrit-MessageType: newpatchset >> Gerrit-Change-Id: I616048c13d03f48aa16d9ff48572b0d5a49d6fb4 >> Gerrit-PatchSet: 4 >> Gerrit-Project: openstack/tricircle >> Gerrit-Branch: master >> Gerrit-Owner: XiongQiu Long >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Chaoyi Huang >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Khayam Gondal >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Ronghui Cao >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Shinobu KINJO >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Shinobu Kinjo >> Gerrit-Reviewer: XiongQiu Long >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Yipei Niu >> Gerrit-Reviewer: Zhiyuan Cai >> Gerrit-Reviewer: lige >> Gerrit-Reviewer: liuhaixia >> Gerrit-Reviewer: shiyangkai >> Gerrit-Reviewer: tangzhuo > > > > -- > Email: > shin...@linux.com > shin...@redhat.com -- Email: shin...@linux.com shin...@redhat.com __ 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
[openstack-dev] [tricircle] cross-OpenStack L2 Networking spec review
Hi Team, Since there was no tag [tricircle] in subject, I'm emailing you again. Sorry for spam -; We are trying to describe specification [1] regarding to ""cross OpenStack L2 networking"" [0] as Chaoyi mentioned in previous message. Honestly that description [0] does not accurately describe what this project is trying to do. And it's hard to be described by few words as well. And he mentioned having a quick look at presentation material. [2] This is fine to understand this project. But it's still not good enough. AFAK it's because that those kind of materials are completely based on our blueprint. [3]. IMHO I would recommend you to start from that blurprint. At least from: 7. Stateless Architecture Proposal If some sentences are not based on that blueprint, that's a problem. But even you read that blueprint, you do not really understand what this project is trying to do. This is a real problem. We have to fix a blueprint first. Otherwise we face double-writes issue which could cause huge risk to this project. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/304540/ [2] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UQWeAMIJgJsWw-cyz9R7NvcAuSWUnKvaZFXLfRAQ6fI/edit [3] https://docs.google.com/document/d/18kZZ1snMOCD9IQvUKI5NVDzSASpw-QKj7l2zNqMEd3g/edit# If I've been missing anything, please point it out to me. Cheers, Shinobu -- Email: shin...@linux.com shin...@redhat.com __ 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
[openstack-dev] [kolla] Gate precheck job failed due to minimum kernel version on ubuntu 14.04
Hi, I see that the minimum kernel version required for ubuntu 14.04 is 4.2 [1]. The precheck job failed on gate because those ubuntu VMs have kernel version 3.13. Shall we add kernel upgrade command (i.e., apt-get install linux-image-generic-lts-wily) in the precheck role? - Hui [1] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/kolla/quickstart.html#installing-dependencies [2] http://logs.openstack.org/19/313819/1/check/gate-kolla-dsvm-deploy-ubuntu-source/f49ad57/console.html#_2016-05-08_02_31_50_295 __ 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] [kolla] Gate precheck job failed due to minimum kernel version on ubuntu 14.04
That won't get you running the new kernel; for that you need to change the image itself. -Rob __ 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] [kolla] Gate precheck job failed due to minimum kernel version on ubuntu 14.04
Robert, Thanks for you reply. Is there any way to change the VM image on the gate? BTW, I do see some kolla deploy gate job successes on kernel 3.13 [1]. Is there any reason kolla needs to check 4.2 on ubuntu 14.04? - Hui [1] http://logs.openstack.org/38/313838/1/check/gate-kolla-dsvm-deploy-ubuntu-source/90ff270/console.html#_2016-05-07_12_42_12_253 On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > That won't get you running the new kernel; for that you need to change > the image itself. > > -Rob > > __ > 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 __ 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] [kolla] Gate precheck job failed due to minimum kernel version on ubuntu 14.04
Hi, @Robert: I was successful to update the kernel without change the image. It seems Kolla is quite unstable. Tutj On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Hui Kang wrote: > Robert, > Thanks for you reply. Is there any way to change the VM image on the gate? > > BTW, I do see some kolla deploy gate job successes on kernel 3.13 [1]. > Is there any reason kolla needs to check 4.2 on ubuntu 14.04? > > - Hui > > [1] > http://logs.openstack.org/38/313838/1/check/gate-kolla-dsvm-deploy-ubuntu-source/90ff270/console.html#_2016-05-07_12_42_12_253 > > On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Robert Collins > wrote: > > That won't get you running the new kernel; for that you need to change > > the image itself. > > > > -Rob > > > > > __ > > 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 > > __ > 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 > __ 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
