On 10/02/2018 01:58 PM, Tom Barron wrote:
Amit Oren has contributed high quality reviews in the last couple of
cycles so I would like to nominated him for manila core.
Please respond with your +1 or -1 votes. We'll hold voting open for 7
days.
+1
Thanks,
-- Tom Barron (tbarron)
On 05/29/2018 03:43 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Agree with Ian here.
Also another problem that comes up is: "Why are you touching *MY*
review?" (probably coming from the view where stats - and stackalytics
leaderboard position is important). So i guess we ask permission
before editing (or) file
like it doesn't
need me to spend all my time pushing it forward, and I can change my
role to contributor and let someone else lead.
I'm thankful for all the support the project has received from
contributors and from the larger OpenStack community.
-Ben Swartzlander
some of our more
horrifying problems, such as users who persist in running ancient
versions, and users who want to upgrade over 2+ years worth of releases
in a single shot. But I don't see how this makes those problems any
worse either.
-Ben Swartzlander
project.
Please respond with a +1/-1.
We will not be having an IRC meeting this Thursday (23^rd November
2017), so if we have sufficient quorum, PTL extraordinaire, Ben
Swartzlander will confirm her nomination here.
Welcome Jun to the manila core reviewer team! Your hard work and
dedication
project.
Please respond with a +1/-1.
+1 from me.
-Ben
We will not be having an IRC meeting this Thursday (23^rd November
2017), so if we have sufficient quorum, PTL extraordinaire, Ben
Swartzlander will confirm her nomination here.
[1]
http://stackalytics.com/?user_id=jun-zhongjun=all
r and what is the use case for it. My current
assumption is that these are effectively broken and removing them will
hurt nobody. If legitimate cases can be found, then we need to find a
way to support them in a more standardized, discoverable fashion.
-Ben Sw
on IRC
with Webex for audio. There is an etherpad [1] with the event details
which we will use the track the bugs, prioritize them, and assign people.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/pike-manila-bug-squash
On 07/18/2017 04:33 PM, Ravi, Goutham wrote:
Hello Manila reviewers,
It has been a few days past the feature proposal freeze, but I would
like to request an extension for an enhancement to the NetApp driver in
Manila. [1] implements a low-impact blueprint [2] that was approved for
the Pike
to exercise
restraint when approving backports, and perhaps go over the checklist
one more time before pressing the +2 button :-)
Thanks for keeping stable branches stable!
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing
I'm not able to chair the meeting tomorrow and nobody has offered to
chair the meeting in my stead so the meeting is canceled. We will meet
as normal week.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List
to
be an outlier and most summits will be relatively cheap/easy to travel to.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org
On 04/28/2017 06:26 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
Hey everybody!
Yay! (I'm sure you're all saying this, given the topic. I'll let you
collect yourself from your exuberant celebration)
== Background ==
As I'm sure you all know, we've been trying to make some hearway for a
while on getting
make it hard to get both done during Pike but the current
plan is to aim to complete both efforts.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/452097/
[2]
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/manila-specs/specs/pike/support-quotas-per-share-type.html
[3] https://review.openstac
On 04/03/2017 03:58 PM, Valeriy Ponomaryov wrote:
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org
<mailto:b...@swartzlander.org>> wrote:
... and we later gave up on supporting remote ZFS using SSH altogether.
-Ben
No, we didn't. It works. Just
On 04/03/2017 02:24 PM, Tom Barron wrote:
We're building an NFS frontend onto the CephFS driver and
are considering the relative merits, for the DHSS=False case,
of following (1) the lvm driver model, and (2) the generic
driver model.
With #1 export locations use a configured address in the
On 03/09/2017 12:10 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote:
Hi Ben,
On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org> wrote:
I might be the only one who has negative feelings about the PTG/Forum split,
but I suspect the foundation is suppressing negative feedback from
Forum format but as of now I'm pretty unhappy with the proposal. For
Manila I'm proposing that the community either meets at PTG and skips
conferences or meetings at conferences and skips PTGs going forward. I'm
not going to ask everyone to travel 4 times a year.
-Ben Swartzlander
Manila PTL
sing timeouts in our test jobs. The plan is to parallelize
these.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-pike-ptg-topics
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: o
For those who missed the weekly meeting tonight there were 2 important
things you should know:
The meeting next week is canceled.
The low-priority spec merge deadline was extended to tomorrow midnight
(18 Nov 23:59 UTC) because we wanted to accept more specs for Ocata, and
there are several
On 11/16/2016 11:28 AM, Ravi, Goutham wrote:
+ [api] in the subject to attract API-WG attention.
We already have a guideline in the API-WG around resource names for “_”
vs “-“ -
https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/naming.html#rest-api-resource-names
. With some exceptions
On 11/16/2016 10:22 AM, Valeriy Ponomaryov wrote:
For the moment Manila project, as well as Cinder, does have
inconsistency between entity and API naming, such as:
- "share type" ("volume type" in Cinder) entity has "/types/{id}" URL
- "share snapshot" ("volume snapshot" in Cinder) entity has
before the spec[1] can get ready to the next review.
The issue was initial raise by Ben Swartzlander on the manila
IPv6 spec[1] (please check PS9 line 56), and this draft only state the
export_location part which is currently fully focused in the spec.
*proposed changes**(Based on Bens
cal future migration options
and how they would affect the API. I'm confident that this is as "safe"
as the API and CLIs can be, and the only downside I can see to this
approach is that it's more verbose than alternatives that include
implicit defaults.
On 11/04/2016 02:00 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote:
Ben Swartzlander wrote:
Thanks to gouthamr for doing these writeups and for recording!
We had a great turn out at the manila Fishbowl and working sessions.
Important notes and Action Items are below:
===
Fishbowl 1: Race
The following specs were designated as review focus specs for Ocata:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-ocata-spec-review-focus
-Ben
On 11/03/2016 12:27 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
As agreed to in the manila spec process spec, the whole core team is
expected to review certain specs
As agreed to in the manila spec process spec, the whole core team is
expected to review certain specs and vote before they merge.
The following specs were designed as review focus specs for Ocata:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-ocata-spec-review-focus
-Ben Swartzlander
Thanks to gouthamr for doing these writeups and for recording!
We had a great turn out at the manila Fishbowl and working sessions.
Important notes and Action Items are below:
===
Fishbowl 1: Race Conditions
===
Thursday 27th Oct / 11:00 - 11:40
On 11/02/2016 06:23 AM, Arne Wiebalck wrote:
Hi Valeriy,
I wasn’t aware, thanks!
So, if each driver exposes the storage_protocols it supports, would it
be sensible to have
manila-ui check the extra_specs for this key and limit the protocol
choice for a given
share type to the supported
+1
-Ben
On 11/02/2016 08:09 AM, Tom Barron wrote:
I hereby propose that we add Goutham Pacha Ravi (gouthamr on IRC) to the
manila core team. This is a clear case where he's already been doing
the review work, excelling both qualitatively and quantitatively, as
well as being a valuable
On 11/01/2016 12:03 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-11-01 00:26:11 -0400 (-0400), Ben Swartzlander wrote:
[...]
As usual I'd like to point to the Linux project as a good example
for how to handle such things. Linux is older than us and has been
dealing with drivers and proprietary code
On 10/31/2016 02:23 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
Last Tuesday we had a cross-project session around the use of proprietary
code/libs/binaries in OpenStack drivers. The challenge we are running into
is where to draw the line with these drivers. What is the appropriate policy
to have in place to
On 10/26/2016 03:53 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
Hey team,
Attached is the proposed new logo for the Cinder project. I think some have
already seen this, so making sure everyone gets a chance to see it before it's
finalized.
Sean (smcginnis)
FTFY
-Ben
Missed it
On October 24, 2016 8:24:11 PM Doug Wiegley
wrote:
As part of a requirements mailing list thread [1], the idea of a servicevm
working group, or a common framework for reference openstack service VMs,
came up. It's too late to get onto the official
I'd like to throw my hat in the ring for the TC election.
My name is Ben Swartzlander (bswartz on IRC) and I've been PTL for the
Manila project for the entire life of the project. I'm also relatively
active within the Cinder project, and I've been part of the OpenStack
community since Essex
On 09/09/2016 11:12 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 9 September 2016 at 17:22, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org
<mailto:b...@swartzlander.org>> wrote:
On 09/08/2016 04:41 PM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
Despite the fact I've appeared to be slightly disagreeing with
l release,
or is the theory that hard string freeze is always subject to exceptions
for "critical" bug fixes?
-Ben Swartzlander
[1]
http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#appropriate-fixes
[2] http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-g
proxy runs on the box
itself? What if it's a separate software package you have to install? I
don't think we can write a set of rules that won't accidentally exclude
things we don't want to exclude.
-Ben Swartzlander
--
Duncan Thomas
___
Refactor the driver to not import the proprietary library
-Ben Swartzlander
Regards,
Alon
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...
On 09/07/2016 01:20 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
For reasons discussed in last week's IRC meeting, we have vacated the
previous logo choice and are redoing the vote.
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_6f0d111cec78c5ef;
akey=d34a751f2d084d79
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin
For reasons discussed in last week's IRC meeting, we have vacated the
previous logo choice and are redoing the vote.
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_6f0d111cec78c5ef;
akey=d34a751f2d084d79
This time I'm using the CIVS system because it will allow us to
determine a #2 and #3
a bad job of writing and
maintaining drivers and the community probably doesn't need to expend as
much effort as it does policing driver quality.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
on the
responsibilities I'll reapply for the tag.
-Ben Swartzlander
On 08/30/2016 01:07 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
Ben has proposed[1] adding manila, manila-ui and python-manilaclient
to the list of deliverables whose vulnerability reports and
advisories are overseen by the OpenStack Vulnerability Management
Team
these
anyways. Also these are small and hopefully not-hard-to-review patches.
If there's anything procedural I need to do to make these patches more
acceptable please let me know, and I'll be watching them over the next
few days and responding to review feedback.
thanks,
-Ben Swartzlander
Manila PTL
On 08/26/2016 02:38 PM, Mehta, jay wrote:
Hello all
,
I am requesting you all to grant me an exception for Pools feature for
HPE 3PAR driver. The patch that implements this feature is:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/329552/implementing blueprint blueprint
hpe3par-pool-support
an FFE for them.
AFAIK there's no problems with these.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
Originally the NFS driver did support snapshots, but it was implemented by
just 'cp'ing the file containing the raw bits. This works fine (if
inefficiently) for unattached volumes, but if you do this on an attached
volume the snapshot won't be crash consistent at all.
It was decided that we
the backlog
of features we have.
thanks,
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org
On 08/16/2016 08:42 AM, Ramana Raja wrote:
On Thursday, June 30, 2016 6:07 PM, Alexey Ovchinnikov
wrote:
Hello everyone,
here I will briefly summarize an export update problem one will encounter
when using nfs-ganesha.
While working on a driver that relies on
On 08/10/2016 01:57 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 09:52:55AM -0700, Clay Gerrard wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org>
wrote:
A big source of problems IMO is that tempest doesn't have stable branches.
We use the master
On 08/10/2016 11:33 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
On Wednesday, 10 August 2016 17:00:36 CEST Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
Luigi Toscano <ltosc...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, 10 August 2016 10:42:41 CEST Ben Swartzlander wrote:
On 08/10/2016 04:33 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
So I tried
of tempest to test stable branches of
other projects, and tempest regularly adds new features. This guarantees
instability if you rely on tempest anywhere in your gate (and cinder does).
-Ben Swartzlander
(I'm aware there are community standards for stable currently, but a lot
of this thread
iver-fixes/newton and driver-fixes/ocata, etc, to
avoid confusion with the stable branches.
-Ben Swartzlander
If you want to change that, work with the stable team on the various options
provided. This tangent of people whining on the mailing list and in
#openstack-cinder is not going to
eaving that mechanism unspecified for the time
being), that you would still want the drivers out of the tree.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-de
hese repos fairly painless.
-Ben Swartzlander
Ihar
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/
ave to recognize that the patch affects a particular
vendor and know which CI system to look at before putting his +2 on.
This is an unfortunate effect of not having 3rd party CI vote.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Developm
he beginning. Add a
requirement for 3rd party CI from the affected vendor to pass and I
think it works and benefits everyone.
-Ben Swartzlander
3. We go with the Neutron model and take drivers out of tree. This is
not something the cinder core team are in favour of - we see significant
value
On 08/06/2016 06:11 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-08-06 17:51:02 -0400 (-0400), Ben Swartzlander wrote:
[...]
when it's no longer to run dsvm jobs on them (because those jobs
WILL eventually break as infra stops maintaining support for very
old releases) then we simply remove those jobs
On 08/06/2016 11:31 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
This may mostly be a Cinder concern, but putting it out there to get
wider input.
For some time now there has been some debate about moving third party
drivers in Cinder to be out of tree. I won't go into that too much,
other than to point out one of
with the governance model for Ceph
though.
-Ben Swartzlander
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Ben Swartzlander [b...@swartzlander.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 10:21 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc
ge running against the latest stable release of
Ceph). It's reasonable to request that we increase our test coverage
with Ceph if it's not good enough and if we are the ones causing the
breakages. But their outside status isn't the problem.
-Ben Swartzlander
I do think this should be fixed
Tom (tbarron on IRC) has been working on OpenStack (both cinder and
manila) for more than 2 years and has spent a great deal of time on
Manila reviews in the last release. Tom brings another package/distro
point of view to the community as well as former storage vendor experience.
-Ben
on the meeting agenda for Thursday to discuss
this in more detail, but if anyone has other feelings please chime in here.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev
r any downsides associated with following established processes.
I strongly doubt any organization would choose to remove a project from
OpenStack for the reasons you mention. If the community doesn't want
these kinds of projects in the big tent then the community probably
needs to push them out.
On 07/29/2016 09:25 AM, John Spray wrote:
Hi folks,
We're starting to look at providing NFS on top of CephFS, using NFS
daemons running in Nova instances. Looking ahead, we can see that
this is likely to run into similar issues in the openstack CI that the
generic driver did.
I got the
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/T9DW7G8
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org
On 07/03/2016 09:19 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 7/1/2016 8:18 PM, Ravi, Goutham wrote:
Thanks Matt.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/334220 adds the upper constraints.
--
Goutham
On 7/1/16, 5:08 PM, "Matt Riedemann" wrote:
The manila periodic stable/liberty
Ramana, I think your questions got answered in a channel discussion last
week, but I just wanted to double check that you weren't still expecting
any answers here. If you were, please reply and we'll keep this thread going.
On June 2, 2016 9:30:39 AM Ramana Raja wrote:
Our midcycle meetup is 2 weeks away! Please propose topics on the etherpad:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-manila-midcycle
Depending on how much material we need to cover I'll decide if we need
the third day or not.
-Ben
using one of the few drivers that
support shares servers (not including the Generic driver) AND they're
still using nova-net instead of neutron. The recommended workaround for
those users is to switch to neutron.
-Ben Swartzlander
eatures in the libraries after the core manila patches
land, they need to go in together.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] http://releases.openstack.org/newton/schedule.html
[2]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack
also need to know so I can get a space reserved. Given the geographic
spread of the team I'm prioritizing remote participation though.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions
I think it makes sense to merge the triplo heat templates without m-dat
support, as including m-dat will require a bunch of dependent patches
and slow everything down. The lack of the m-dat service won't cause any
issues other than that the experimental share-migration APIs won't work.
We
rs, but let's make it clear that they're not the same.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] For all X, Y in (0, 1): X * Y < X
3. Are there performance problems where python really can't get there?
This seems like a pretty clear "yes". It shouldn't be surprising. Python
has no jit (yes there is pypy,
On 05/09/2016 07:43 PM, Rayson Ho wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org
<mailto:b...@swartzlander.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps for mature languages. But go is still finding its way, and that
>> usually involves rapid chang
ltiple
plugable implementations.
-Ben Swartzlander
Also worth noting, is that go is not a "language runtime" but a compiler
(that happens to statically link in a runtime to the binaries it
produces...).
The point here though, is that the versions of Python that OpenStack
has traditionally support
, May 5, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org> wrote:
On 05/05/2016 03:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-05-05 12:03:38 -0400 (-0400), Ben Swartzlander wrote:
It appears that many of the existing specs repos contain a
confusing mixture of Apache 2.0 license
On 05/05/2016 03:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-05-05 12:03:38 -0400 (-0400), Ben Swartzlander wrote:
It appears that many of the existing specs repos contain a
confusing mixture of Apache 2.0 licensed code and Creative Commons
licensed docs.
[...]
Recollection is that the prose
-created manila-specs
repo, and I'm happy with whatever the TC is currently recommending.
-Ben Swartzlander
[1] https://github.com/openstack-dev/specs-cookiecutter
[2]
https://github.com/openstack-dev/specs-cookiecutter/commit/8738f58981da3ad9c0f27fb545d61747213482a4#diff
Here at the design summit I've been asked a few times where the
etherpads are. Here is a link to the top level page for design summit
etherpads:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Design_Summit/Newton/Etherpads#Manila
-Ben
)
*Sent:* Friday, February 26, 2016 3:22 PM
*To:* 'OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)'
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
*Cc:* 'bswa...@netapp.com' <bswa...@netapp.com>; 'Ben Swartzlander'
<b...@swartzlander.org>
*Subject:* [OpenStack-Dev
I've started an etherpad to collect ideas for summit topics:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/manila-newton-summit-topics
Please add your suggestions to the top section and we'll get them
categorized and scheduled in the bottom section in time for Austin.
-Ben Swartzlander
e fallback path even if we did merge these changes.
Csaba, thank you for getting these changes done and we will merge them
early in Newton. We need to decide as a community how to get the
remaining drivers updated in Newton so we can remove the fallback path.
-Ben Swartzlan
to be
more careful about selecting a more stable and widely-supported
container platform.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org
On 03/11/2016 02:42 PM, O'Rourke, Alex Liam wrote:
Hi,
I would like to request a Feature Freeze Exception for Removing the File
Tree on Delete When Using Nested Shares with 3PAR:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290209/
Originally, this was filed as a blueprint and marked as a new feature
On 03/11/2016 02:42 PM, O'Rourke, Alex Liam wrote:
Hi,
I would like to request a Feature Freeze Exception for Removing the File
Tree on Delete When Using Nested Shares with 3PAR:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/290209/
Originally, this was filed as a blueprint and marked as a new feature
On 03/04/2016 08:15 AM, John Spray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Shinobu Kinjo wrote:
What are you facing?
In this particular instance, I'm dealing with a case where we may add
some metadata in ceph that will get updated by the driver, and I need
to know how
On 03/05/2016 05:34 AM, Shinobu Kinjo wrote:
Are we still going to think of nfs-over-vsock?
Never mind. It's just coming from my curiosity.
A lot of work outside Manila has to happen before we can actually
deliver that feature in OpenStack. If you google about nfs over vsock
you can learn
. It makes sense as a short term hack but
given that we have time to design this correctly I'd prefer to get this
information in a more straighforward way.
-Ben Swartzlander
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com
<mailto:ihrac...@redhat.com>> wrote
onally in the future.
If any drivers are currently turning root squash on, I would consider
that a bug -- and it will prevent migration for working on your backend.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development Mailing
On 02/19/2016 11:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 02/19/2016 11:15 AM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
On 02/19/2016 10:57 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 02/18/2016 10:38 AM, D'Angelo, Scott wrote:
Cinder team is proposing to add support for API microversions [1]. It
came up at our mid-cycle that we should add
ems or both.
-Ben Swartzlander
5) that client issues a request against a resource on /v2 with
parameters that would create a radically different situation that would
be hard to figure out later.
And, only if all these things happen is there a concern.
So let's look at each one.
1) clients alre
to be
distracted by fixing this kind of thing. If this driver is something
people actively use and find valuable, then it should not be hard to
find a volunteer to fix it.
-Ben Swartzlander
__
OpenStack Development
On 02/02/2016 12:30 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
Rodrigo (ganso on IRC) joined the Manila project back in the Kilo
release and has been working on share migration (an important core
feature) for the last 2 releases. Since Tokyo he has dedicated himself
to reviews and community participation. I
core reviewer team.
-Ben Swartzlander
Manila PTL
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin
On 01/06/2016 02:53 AM, nidhi.h...@wipro.com wrote:
Hi All,
https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1526284
(snip)
Where we are intentionally giving *create_share_instance=False that
means in db function *
I think I agree it would make more sense to create the first instance at
the same
On 12/22/2015 12:26 AM, nidhi.h...@wipro.com wrote:
Hi all.
I am working on bug 1503390. (status=None while delete is in progress
)
I was doing analysis of problem and found that yes its there.
I reproduced it.
Now the two solutions proposed..
1)Either say the status as deleting for such
On 12/04/2015 04:42 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
On 11/19/2015 01:00 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
If you planning to attend the midcycle in any capacity, please vote your
preferences here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BXPLDXT
The results of the survey were clear. Most people prefer the week
On 12/03/2015 06:38 AM, John Spray wrote:
Hi,
We're working towards getting the devstack/CI parts ready to test the
forthcoming ceph native driver, and have a question: will a driver be
accepted into the tree if it has CI for running the api/ tempest
tests, but not the scenario/ tempest tests?
On 11/19/2015 01:00 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote:
If you planning to attend the midcycle in any capacity, please vote your
preferences here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BXPLDXT
The results of the survey were clear. Most people prefer the week of Jan
12-14.
There was an offer to host
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo