Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Would an api option to create an instance without powering on be useful?

On 11/30/18 6:06 AM, Matthew Booth wrote: I have a request to do $SUBJECT in relation to a V2V workflow. The use case here is conversion of a VM/Physical which was previously powered off. We want to move its data, but we don't want to be powering on stuff which wasn't previously on. This

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Next two meetings

On 11/7/18 2:19 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: Hi, Next week is summit and a lot of our contributors will be traveling there on Monday, so let's skip the meeting. The following week I will also be out, so if anyone wants to run the meeting please let me know. Otherwise we'll skip that one too

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Next two meetings

Hi, Next week is summit and a lot of our contributors will be traveling there on Monday, so let's skip the meeting. The following week I will also be out, so if anyone wants to run the meeting please let me know. Otherwise we'll skip that one too and reconvene after Thanksgiving. If you

Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer][oslo.cache][oslo] ceilometer fails to publish to gnocchi

On 11/6/18 3:25 AM, Eyal B wrote: Hi, Because of this fix https://review.openstack.org/#/c/611369/ ceilometer which uses oslo.cache for redis fails to publish to gnocchi see this log:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [Openstack-sigs] Dropping lazy translation support

On 11/5/18 3:13 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 11/5/2018 1:36 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: I think the lazy stuff was all about the API responses. The log translations worked a completely different way. Yeah maybe. And if so, I came across this in one of the blueprints:

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Zuul Queue backlogs and resource usage

On 10/30/18 4:16 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, at 1:01 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 10/30/18 1:25 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ben Nemec wrote: Tagging with tripleo since my suggestion below

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] reducing our upstream CI footprint

On 10/31/18 4:59 PM, Harald Jensås wrote: On Wed, 2018-10-31 at 11:39 -0600, Wesley Hayutin wrote: On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:21 AM Alex Schultz wrote: Hey everyone, Based on previous emails around this[0][1], I have proposed a possible reducing in our usage by switching the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Zuul Queue backlogs and resource usage

On 10/30/18 1:25 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ben Nemec wrote: Tagging with tripleo since my suggestion below is specific to that project. On 10/30/18 11:03 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: Hello everyone

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Zuul Queue backlogs and resource usage

Tagging with tripleo since my suggestion below is specific to that project. On 10/30/18 11:03 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: Hello everyone, A little while back I sent email explaining how the gate queues work and how fixing bugs helps us test and merge more code. All of this still is still true

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Project Update Etherpad

Good news! The Foundation found space for us to do a project update session, so now we need to figure out what to talk about. I've started an etherpad at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo-project-update-stein to list the possible topics. Please add or expand on the ones I've pre-populated

Re: [openstack-dev] Proposal for a process to keep up with Python releases

On 10/25/18 3:43 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: On 25/10/18 1:38 PM, William M Edmonds wrote: Zane Bitter wrote on 10/22/2018 03:12:46 PM:  > On 22/10/18 10:33 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:  > > On 10/19/18 5:17 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:  > >> Integration Tests  > >> -  > >>  > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-25 Update

On 10/23/18 9:55 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: On 24/10/18 2:09 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 10/22/18 5:40 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 10/22/2018 4:35 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: The one other open question I have is about the Adjutant change [2]. I know Adjutant is very new and I'm not sure what

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-25 Update

On 10/23/18 9:58 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 10/23/2018 8:09 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: Can't we just add a noop command like we are for the services that don't currently need upgrade checks? We could, but I was also hoping that for most projects we will actually be able to replace the noop

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-25 Update

On 10/22/18 5:40 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 10/22/2018 4:35 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: The one other open question I have is about the Adjutant change [2]. I know Adjutant is very new and I'm not sure what upgrades look like for that project, so I don't really know how valuable adding the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] [api] Paste Maintenance

On 10/22/18 10:32 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: I can spin up the code and make it available. There is an example (highly-flask specific right now, but would be easy to make it generic) from keystone [0] has been implemented. Where should this code live? A new library? oslo.?  The

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Next meeting cancelled

Hi, Sorry for the late notice, but I just found out I'm going to be travelling next week, which will mean I can't run the meeting. Since Doug is also out and it's really late to find someone else to run it, we're just going to skip it. We'll resume as normal the following week. Also note

Re: [openstack-dev] [mistral][oslo][messaging] Removing “blocking” executor from oslo.messaging

On 10/18/18 9:59 AM, Ken Giusti wrote: Hi Renat, The biggest issue with the blocking executor (IMHO) is that it blocks the protocol I/O while  RPC processing is in progress.  This increases the likelihood that protocol processing will not get done in a timely manner and things start to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-26 Update

On 10/15/18 3:27 AM, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote: On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 17:05 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: The big update this week is version 0.1.0 of oslo.upgradecheck was released. The documentation along with usage examples can be found here [1]. A big thanks to Ben Nemec for getting

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Config Validator

Hi, We recently merged a new feature to oslo.config and it was suggested that I publicize it since it addresses a longstanding pain point. It's a validator tool[1] that will warn or error on any entries in a config file that aren't defined in the service or are deprecated. Previously this

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

On 10/11/18 8:53 AM, Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora wrote: So for example, I don't see why changes at tripleo-quickstart can be reset if tripleo-ui fails, this is the kind of thing that maybe can be optimize. Because if two incompatible changes are proposed to tripleo-quickstart and

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][taskflow] Thoughts on moving taskflow out of openstack/oslo

On 10/10/18 1:35 PM, Greg Hill wrote: I'm not sure how using pull requests instead of Gerrit changesets would help "core reviewers being pulled on to other projects"? The 2 +2 requirement works for larger projects with a lot of contributors. When you have only 3 regular

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][glance][cinder][keystone][requirements] blocking oslo.messaging 9.0.0

On 10/9/18 10:19 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Brian Rosmaita writes: On 10/8/18 11:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: several projects have had problems with the new release, some have ways of working around it, and some do not. I'm sending this just to raise the issue and allow a place to discuss

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][glance][cinder][keystone][requirements] blocking oslo.messaging 9.0.0

On 10/9/18 9:06 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote: Keystone is failing because it's missing a fix from oslo.messaging [0]. That said, keystone is also relying on an internal implementation detail in oslo.messaging by mocking it in tests [1]. The notification work has been around in keystone for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][glance][cinder][keystone][requirements] blocking oslo.messaging 9.0.0

On 10/9/18 8:22 AM, Brian Rosmaita wrote: On 10/8/18 11:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: several projects have had problems with the new release, some have ways of working around it, and some do not. I'm sending this just to raise the issue and allow a place to discuss solutions. Currently there

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic][tripleo] Tenks

On 10/2/18 9:37 AM, Mark Goddard wrote: On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 14:03, Jay Pipes > wrote: On 10/02/2018 08:58 AM, Mark Goddard wrote: > Hi, > > In the most recent Ironic meeting we discussed [1] tenks, and the > possibility of adding the

[openstack-dev] [oslo] PTG wrapup

A bit belated, but here goes: Monday: Had a good discussion in the Keystone room about oslo.limit with some Nova developers. There was quite a bit of discussion around how the callbacks should work for resource usage and cleanup, and the Nova developers took an action to do some prototyping.

Re: [openstack-dev] [goal][python3] week 7 update

On 9/28/18 1:38 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2018-09-28 13:58:52 -0400 (-0400), William M Edmonds wrote: Doug Hellmann wrote on 09/26/2018 06:29:11 PM: * We do not want to set the override once in testenv, because that breaks the more specific versions used in default environments like

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][castellan] Time for a 1.0 release?

On 9/28/18 3:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Ade Lee wrote: On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 16:30 -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: Doug pointed out on a recent Oslo release review that castellan is still not officially 1.0. Given the age of the project and the fact that we're asking people to deploy a Castellan

Re: [openstack-dev] [python3-first] support in stable branches

On 9/27/18 10:36 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Dariusz Krol writes: Hello Champions :) I work on the Trove project and we are wondering if python3 should be supported in previous releases as well? Actually this question was asked by Alan Pevec from the stable branch maintainers list. I saw

Re: [openstack-dev] [storyboard] Prioritization?

On 9/27/18 4:17 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Ben Nemec wrote: On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Absence of priorities was an initial design choice[1] based on the fact that in an open collaboration every group, team, organization has their own views on what the priority of a story

Re: [openstack-dev] [storyboard][oslo] Fewer stories than bugs?

(diablo_rojo) On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:38 PM Ben Nemec <mailto:openst...@nemebean.com>> wrote: This is a more oslo-specific (maybe) question that came out of the test migration. I noticed that launchpad is reporting 326 open bugs across the Oslo projects, but in S

Re: [openstack-dev] [storyboard] Prioritization?

On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Doug Hellmann wrote: I think we need to reconsider that position if it's going to block adoption. I think Ben's case is an excellent second example of where having a field to hold some sort of priority value would be useful. Absence of priorities

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] OVB 1.0 and Upcoming Changes

(this is a reprint of a blog post I just made. I'm sending it here explicitly too because most (maybe all) of the major users are here. See also http://blog.nemebean.com/content/ovb-10-and-upcoming-changes) The time has come to declare a 1.0 version for OVB. There are a couple of reasons for

Re: [openstack-dev] [storyboard] why use different "bug" tags per project?

On 9/26/18 8:20 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2018-09-26 00:50:16 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote: At the PTG, it was suggested that each project should tag their bugs with "-bug" to avoid tags being "leaked" across projects, or something like that. Could someone elaborate on why this was

[openstack-dev] [oslo][castellan] Time for a 1.0 release?

Doug pointed out on a recent Oslo release review that castellan is still not officially 1.0. Given the age of the project and the fact that we're asking people to deploy a Castellan-compatible keystore as one of the base services, it's probably time to address that. To that end, I'm sending

[openstack-dev] [storyboard][oslo] Fewer stories than bugs?

This is a more oslo-specific (maybe) question that came out of the test migration. I noticed that launchpad is reporting 326 open bugs across the Oslo projects, but in Storyboard there are only 266 stories created. While I'm totally onboard with reducing our bug backlog, I'm curious why that

[openstack-dev] [storyboard] Prioritization?

Hi, This came up in the Oslo meeting as a result of my initial look at the test Storyboard import. It appears all of the priority data from launchpad gets lost in the migration, which is going to make organizing hundreds of bugs somewhat difficult. I'm particularly not fond of it after

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-29 Update

On 09/22/2018 11:15 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 9/21/2018 4:19 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: * The only two projects that I'm aware of with patches up at this point are monasca [2] and designate [3]. The monasca one is tricky because as I've found going through release notes for some projects

[openstack-dev] [oslo] upgradecheck core list populated

Hey, The oslo.upgradecheck core list is now populated. oslo-core and Matt Riedemann should have +2 rights on it, so review away! :-) -Ben __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-29 Update

On 09/21/2018 03:53 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: Updates for this week: * As bnemec noted in the last update [1], he's making some progress with the oslo.upgradecheck library. He's retrofitting the nova-status upgrade check code to use the library and has a patch up for designate to use it.

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Storyboard test import done

Hi, The test import of the Oslo projects is done (thanks Kendall!), so everyone from the Oslo team please take a look around and provide feedback on it. If we do the migration this cycle we want to do it earlier rather than later so we aren't dealing with migration fallout while trying to

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-30 update

left any thoughts. I have not gone through all projects yet. * Ben Nemec has extracted the common upgrade check CLI framework into a library [3] (thanks Ben!) and is working on getting that imported into Gerrit. It would be great if projects that start working on the goal can try using

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-31 update

On 09/12/2018 01:57 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Ben Nemec's message of 2018-09-12 13:51:16 -0600: On 09/04/2018 06:49 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 9/4/2018 6:39 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: Would it be helpful to factor some of the common code out into an Oslo library so projects

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-31 update

On 09/04/2018 06:49 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 9/4/2018 6:39 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: Would it be helpful to factor some of the common code out into an Oslo library so projects basically just have to subclass, implement check functions, and add them to the _upgrade_checks dict? It's not a huge

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] about unified limits

with the current plan for other projects that would be good. On 09/10/2018 09:25 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: We had talked about Tuesday afternoon. I need to sync up with Lance and figure out exactly when will work best. On 09/08/2018 10:58 AM, Jay S Bryant wrote: Ben, Ping me when you are planning

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] about unified limits

like to try to be there. Thanks! Jay On 9/7/2018 1:43 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: I will also note that I had an oslo.limit topic on the Oslo PTG schedule: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo-stein-ptg-planning I don't know whether anybody from Jaze's team will be there, but if so that would

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] about unified limits

I will also note that I had an oslo.limit topic on the Oslo PTG schedule: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo-stein-ptg-planning I don't know whether anybody from Jaze's team will be there, but if so that would be a good opportunity for some face-to-face discussion. I didn't give it a whole

Re: [openstack-dev] [election] [tc] TC candidacy

On 09/07/2018 11:19 AM, Samuel Cassiba wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Samuel Cassiba wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 9/5/2018 2:49 PM, Samuel Cassiba wrote: Though my hands-on experience goes back several releases, I still view things from the

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable][keystone] python3 goal progress and tox_install.sh removal

On 09/06/2018 03:01 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: I'm noticing some odd cases with respect to the python 3 community goal [0]. So far my findings are specific to keystone repositories, but I can imagine this affecting other projects. Doug generated the python 3 reviews for keystone

[openstack-dev] [oslo] PTG Schedule

Hi, I've added some tentative times to the planning etherpad[1]. This is all subject to change but I wanted to get something out there for people to look at. If you have other project responsibilities that day please let me know if anything conflicts. As you can see we have a fair amount of

Re: [openstack-dev] [goals][upgrade-checkers] Week R-31 update

Would it be helpful to factor some of the common code out into an Oslo library so projects basically just have to subclass, implement check functions, and add them to the _upgrade_checks dict? It's not a huge amount of code, but a bunch of it seems like it would need to be copy-pasted into

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Bumping eventlet to 0.24.1

Just a heads up that for oslo.service we're going to need https://review.openstack.org/#/c/598384 and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/599032/1 for eventlet 0.24.1 compatibility. There aren't any functional issues as far as I can tell, but some unit tests were broken by new behavior. On

[openstack-dev] [oslo] No meeting next two weeks

Next week is a US holiday so a lot of the team will be off, and the week after is the PTG. If you have anything to discuss in the meantime feel free to contact us in #openstack-oslo or here on the list. -Ben __ OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [Tripleo] fluentd logging status

On 08/24/2018 04:17 AM, Juan Badia Payno wrote: Recently, I did a little test regarding fluentd logging on the gates master[1], queens[2], pike [3]. I don't like the status of it, I'm still working on them, but basically there are quite a lot of misconfigured logs and some services that they

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] UUID sentinel needs a home

On 08/23/2018 12:25 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Eric Fried's message of 2018-08-23 09:51:21 -0500: Do you mean an actual fixture, that would be used like: class MyTestCase(testtools.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.uuids =

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][oslo][release][requirements] FFE request for castellan

Because castellan is in global-requirements, we need an FFE from requirements too. Can someone from the requirements team respond to the review? Thanks. On 08/16/2018 04:34 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: The backport has merged and I've proposed the release here: https://review.openstack.org/592746

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][oslo][release] FFE request for castellan

The backport has merged and I've proposed the release here: https://review.openstack.org/592746 On 08/15/2018 11:58 AM, Ade Lee wrote: Done. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/592154/ Thanks, Ade On Wed, 2018-08-15 at 09:20 -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: On 08/14/2018 01:56 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] migrating to storyboard

Is there any plan to have a session where the current and future users of storyboard can get together and discuss how it's going? On 08/16/2018 02:47 PM, Jay S Bryant wrote: Hey, Well, the attachments are one of the things holding us up along with reduced participation in the project and a

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Proposing Zane Bitter as oslo.service core

Since there were no objections, I've added Zane to the oslo.service core team. Thanks and welcome, Zane! On 08/03/2018 11:58 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: Hi, Zane has been doing some good work in oslo.service recently and I would like to add him to the core team.  I know he's got a lot on his plate

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][oslo][release] FFE request for castellan

On 08/14/2018 01:56 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: On 08/10/2018 10:15 AM, Ade Lee wrote: Hi all, I'd like to request a feature freeze exception to get the following change in for castellan. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/575800/ This extends the functionality of the vault backend to provide

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Reminder about the weekly Cinder meeting ...

reducing the number of people in my ping but it still kicked me and so I decided to not risk it again. Sounds like the moral of the story is if sigyn is in the channel, be careful.  :-) Jay On 8/13/2018 4:06 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 08/08/2018 12:04 PM, Jay S Bryant wrote: Team

Re: [openstack-dev] [barbican][oslo][release] FFE request for castellan

On 08/10/2018 10:15 AM, Ade Lee wrote: Hi all, I'd like to request a feature freeze exception to get the following change in for castellan. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/575800/ This extends the functionality of the vault backend to provide previously uninmplemented functionality, so it

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] proposing Moisés Guimarães for oslo.config core

On 08/08/2018 08:18 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2018-08-01 09:27:09 -0400: Moisés Guimarães (moguimar) did quite a bit of work on oslo.config during the Rocky cycle to add driver support. Based on that work, and a discussion we have had since then about

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Reminder about the weekly Cinder meeting ...

On 08/08/2018 12:04 PM, Jay S Bryant wrote: Team, A reminder that we have our weekly Cinder meeting on Wednesdays at 16:00 UTC.  I bring this up as I can no longer send the courtesy pings without being kicked from IRC.  So, if you wish to join the meeting please add a reminder to your

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Proposing Zane Bitter as oslo.service core

Hi, Zane has been doing some good work in oslo.service recently and I would like to add him to the core team. I know he's got a lot on his plate already, but he has taken the time to propose and review patches in oslo.service and has demonstrated an understanding of the code. Please

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] How to debug no valid host failures with placement

On 08/01/2018 06:05 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 8/1/2018 3:55 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: I changed disk_allocation_ratio to 2.0 in the config file and it had no effect on the existing resource provider.  I assume that is because I had initially deployed with it unset, so I got 1.0, and when I

[openstack-dev] [oslo] PTL on PTO, no meeting next week

I'm out next week and I'm told Monday is a bank holiday in some places, so we're going to skip the Oslo meeting for August 6th. Of course if you have issues you don't have to wait for a meeting to ask. The Oslo team is pretty much always around in #openstack-oslo. I should be back the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] How to debug no valid host failures with placement

On 08/01/2018 02:22 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 8/1/2018 12:06 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: To close the loop on the problem I was having, it looks like the allocation_ratio config opts are now just defaults, and if you want to change ratios after the initial deployment you need to do so

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] How to debug no valid host failures with placement

On 08/01/2018 11:23 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 08/01/2018 09:58 AM, Andrey Volkov wrote: Hi, It seems you need first to check what placement knows about resources of your cloud. This can be done either with REST API [1] or with osc-placement [2]. For osc-placement you could use: pip

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] How to debug no valid host failures with placement

-ref/placement/ [2] https://docs.openstack.org/osc-placement/latest/index.html On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:16 PM Ben Nemec <mailto:openst...@nemebean.com>> wrote: Hi, I'm having an issue with no valid host errors when starting instances and I'm struggling to figure out why. 

[openstack-dev] [nova] How to debug no valid host failures with placement

Hi, I'm having an issue with no valid host errors when starting instances and I'm struggling to figure out why. I thought the problem was disk space, but I changed the disk_allocation_ratio and I'm still getting no valid host. The host does have plenty of disk space free, so that shouldn't

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] proposing Moisés Guimarães for oslo.config core

+1 On 08/01/2018 08:27 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Moisés Guimarães (moguimar) did quite a bit of work on oslo.config during the Rocky cycle to add driver support. Based on that work, and a discussion we have had since then about general cleanup needed in oslo.config, I think he would make a good

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI

On 07/31/2018 04:51 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:41 AM Sagi Shnaidman > wrote: Hi, Martin I see master OVB jobs are passing now [1], please recheck. [1] http://cistatus.tripleo.org/ Things have improved and I see a lot of

Re: [openstack-dev] [release] Github release tarballs broken

On 07/30/2018 02:04 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 12:02:50PM -0500, Ben Nemec wrote: According to https://bugs.launchpad.net/pbr/+bug/1742809 our github release tarballs don't actually work. It seems to be a github-specific issue because I was unable to reproduce

[openstack-dev] [release] Github release tarballs broken

According to https://bugs.launchpad.net/pbr/+bug/1742809 our github release tarballs don't actually work. It seems to be a github-specific issue because I was unable to reproduce the problem with a tarball from releases.openstack.org. My best guess is that github's release process differs

[openstack-dev] [oslo] PTL candidacy

You can find my statement at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/587096/1/candidates/stein/Oslo/openstack%2540nemebean.com That's certainly not an exhaustive list of what I plan to do next cycle, but given the size of our team I thought my time was better spent doing those things than writing a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Setting swift as glance backend

It looks like Glance defaults to Swift, so you shouldn't need to do anything: https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-heat-templates/blob/master/puppet/services/glance-api.yaml#L96 On 07/26/2018 12:41 AM, Samuel Monderer wrote: Hi, I would like to deploy a small overcloud with just one

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Editable environments with resource registry entries

Hi, This came up recently on my review to add an environment to enable Designate in a TripleO deployment. It needs to set both resource registry entries and some user-configurable parameters, which means users need to make a copy of it that they can edit. However, if the file moves then

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] prototype with standalone mode and remote edge compute nodes

On 07/20/2018 02:06 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:55 PM Ben Nemec <mailto:openst...@nemebean.com>> wrote: Okay, based on a private conversation this is coming off as way more troll-ish than I intended.  I don't understand where this work is

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] prototype with standalone mode and remote edge compute nodes

On 07/20/2018 02:53 PM, James Slagle wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 07/19/2018 03:37 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: Today I played a little bit with Standalone deployment [1] to deploy a single OpenStack cloud without the need of an undercloud and overcloud

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] prototype with standalone mode and remote edge compute nodes

Okay, based on a private conversation this is coming off as way more troll-ish than I intended. I don't understand where this work is going, but I don't really need to so I'll step back from the discussion. Apologies for any offense. -Ben On 07/20/2018 12:20 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 07/20

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] prototype with standalone mode and remote edge compute nodes

On 07/20/2018 01:18 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: On 7/20/18 2:13 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: On 07/19/2018 03:37 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: Today I played a little bit with Standalone deployment [1] to deploy a single OpenStack cloud without the need of an undercloud and overcloud. The use-case I

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] prototype with standalone mode and remote edge compute nodes

On 07/19/2018 03:37 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: Today I played a little bit with Standalone deployment [1] to deploy a single OpenStack cloud without the need of an undercloud and overcloud. The use-case I am testing is the following: "As an operator, I want to deploy a single node OpenStack,

Re: [openstack-dev] Disk space requirement - any way to lower it a little?

On 07/19/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Belanger wrote: On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:30:27PM +0200, Cédric Jeanneret wrote: Hello, While trying to get a new validation¹ in the undercloud preflight checks, I hit an (not so) unexpected issue with the CI: it doesn't provide flavors with the minimal

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Stein blueprint - Plan to remove Keepalived support (replaced by Pacemaker)

On 07/17/2018 03:00 PM, Michele Baldessari wrote: Hi Jarda, thanks for these perspectives, this is very valuable! On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 06:01:21PM +0200, Jaromir Coufal wrote: Not rooting for any approach here, just want to add a bit of factors which might play a role when deciding which

[openstack-dev] [oslo][all] Heads up for the new oslo.policy release

I just wanted to send a quick note about the recent oslo.policy release which may impact some projects. Some new functionality was added that allows a context object to be passed in to the enforcer directly, but as part of that we added a check that the type of the object passed in was valid

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] Reminder about Oslo feature freeze

on doing final feature releases until that has all merged. -Ben On 07/05/2018 11:46 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: Hi, This is just a reminder that Oslo observes feature freeze earlier than other projects so those projects have time to implement any new features from Oslo.  Per the policy[1] we freeze one

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: [TIP] tox release 3.1.1

On 07/12/2018 04:29 PM, Eric Fried wrote: Here it is for nova. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/582392/ also don't love that immediately bumping the lower bound for tox is going to be kind of disruptive to a lot of people. By "kind of disruptive," do you mean: $ tox -e blah ERROR:

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Stein PTG planning etherpad

All the cool kids are doing it, so here's one for Oslo: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo-stein-ptg-planning I've populated it with a few topics that I expect to discuss, but feel free to add anything you're interested in. Thanks. -Ben

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: [TIP] tox release 3.1.1

On 07/09/2018 11:16 AM, Eric Fried wrote: Doug- How long til we can start relying on the new behavior in the gate? I gots me some basepython to purge... I want to point out that most projects require a rather old version of tox, so chances are most people are not staying up to

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] easily identifying how services are configured

(adding the list back) On 07/06/2018 12:05 PM, Dan Prince wrote: On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 12:03 PM Ben Nemec wrote: On 07/05/2018 01:23 PM, Dan Prince wrote: On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 14:13 -0400, James Slagle wrote: I would almost rather see us organize the directories by service name

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] easily identifying how services are configured

On 07/05/2018 01:23 PM, Dan Prince wrote: On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 14:13 -0400, James Slagle wrote: I would almost rather see us organize the directories by service name/project instead of implementation. Instead of: puppet/services/nova-api.yaml puppet/services/nova-conductor.yaml

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 18-26

Red Hat OpenStack is based on RDO. It's not pretty far from it, it's very close. It's basically productized RDO, and in the interest of everyone's sanity we try to keep the downstream patches to a minimum. In general I would be careful trying to take the distro analogy too far though. The

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Reminder about Oslo feature freeze

Hi, This is just a reminder that Oslo observes feature freeze earlier than other projects so those projects have time to implement any new features from Oslo. Per the policy[1] we freeze one week before the non-client library feature freeze, which is coming in two weeks. Therefore, we have

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] SOFT_REBOOT powers off/on the server

A soft reboot should allow the server to shut down gracefully. A reset wouldn't do that, at least as I understand it. A reset would be more appropriate for a hard reboot, although I see Dmitry had a couple of other concerns with implementing it as a reset on the review. -Ben On 06/25/2018

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] Need new release of heat-translator library

On 06/20/2018 02:58 AM, Patil, Tushar wrote: Hi, Few weeks back, we had proposed a patch [1] to add support for translation of placement policies and that patch got merged. This feature will be consumed by tacker specs [2] which we are planning to implement in Rocky release and it's

[openstack-dev] [oslo] Summit onboarding and project update slides

As promised in the sessions, here are the slides that were presented: https://www.slideshare.net/BenNemec1/oslo-vancouver-onboarding https://www.slideshare.net/BenNemec1/oslo-vancouver-project-update The font in the onboarding one got a little funny in the conversion, so if you want to see

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Eventlet + SSL + Python 3 = broken monkey patching leading to completely broken glance-api

This is a known problem: https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.service/+bug/1482633 There have been some discussions on what to do about it but I don't think we have a definite plan yet. It also came up in the Python 3 support thread for some more context:

Re: [openstack-dev] [docs] Automating documentation the tripleo way?

On 05/16/2018 10:39 AM, Petr Kovar wrote: Hi all, In the past few years, we've seen several efforts aimed at automating procedural documentation, mostly centered around the OpenStack installation guide. This idea to automatically produce and verify installation steps or similar procedures was

[openstack-dev] [oslo] No meeting next two weeks

As discussed in the meeting this week, we plan to skip the Oslo meeting for the next two weeks. The first is during Summit, and the second is the first full day back for many of us so it's unlikely there will be much new to talk about. Meetings will resume as normal after that, and if

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >