Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Mike, # 2 don't agree, we already generate from templates required information for a plugin developer to start development, purpose of plugin examples is different, it's used as integration tests for plugins, also QA team uses them as Functional tests, they overloaded with tasks and designed to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Compatibility of fuel plugins and fuel versions

Hi Mike, comments are inline. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Mike Scherbakov wrote: > Hi folks, > in order to make a decision whether we need to support example plugins, > and if actually need them [1], I'd suggest to discuss more common things > about plugins. > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On 03/01/2016 12:21 PM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Moreover, having such git ref as a source in our Puppetfile will lead to > the situation when we have UNREPRODUCIBLE build of Fuel project. Each > build may and will result in different code and you will not be able to > tell which one without

[openstack-dev] [fuel][Fuel-web] : make html command not working

i have cloned fuel repo and follow https://docs.fuel-infra.org/fuel-dev/develop/env.html steps : in section 5.7 building Documentaion . when i run command " make html " it gives follow error. (fuel-web-venv)pramesh@pramesh:~/Documents/fuel-web/docs$ make html sphinx-build -b html -W -d

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Mike, #1 - If you truly agree with that, you should weigh in here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287286/ #2 - Requires a blueprint and new docs, but okay. #3 - Yes! We have very poor CI for fuel plugin builder. All it does is ensure it makes a plugin, not that it can be installed and deployed.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Compatibility of fuel plugins and fuel versions

Hi Mike, Normally I would support your idea, but the reality is any plugin from 7.0 that defines a plugin role isn't going to work in 8.0 or 9.0. We changed too many task names and you just can't make a plugin support both versions not without something incredibly clever that I haven't

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Folks, here is what I think: 1) I suggest to fix what is broken now. So that people who come across examples would not have to deal with issues. We may debate for other few days (hopefully not more), and all plugin devs will be suffering during this time. Also, according to Matt, > I should add

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Compatibility of fuel plugins and fuel versions

Hi folks, in order to make a decision whether we need to support example plugins, and if actually need them [1], I'd suggest to discuss more common things about plugins. My thoughts: 1) This is not good, that our plugins created for Fuel 8 won't even install on Fuel 9. By default, we should

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 10:56:04PM +, Andrew Woodward wrote: > Issue: moving to puppet-openstack on master has exposed fuel-library > to breakage and there are many concerns about changes landing that can > break it. > > Alex S. Proposed that we continue the course, and finish setting up >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Today we had a sync up call and discussed this. To summarize Attendees: Aleksandr Didenko Alex Schultz Andrew Woodward Alexey Shtokolov Bartek Kupidura Bogdan Dobrelya Denis Egorenko Ivan Berezovskiy Kyrylo Galanov Maksim Malchuk Matthew Mosesohn Max Yatsenko Oleg Gelbukh Oleksiy Molchanov Petr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On 02/29/2016 11:19 AM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Hi Ivan > > Thanks for bringing this up. Frankly, I think that we hurried a little > bit by making our integration with upstream puppet manifests too > continuous. I would suppose that we used a little bit different technique. > > First of all, we

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Because it doesn't make much sense for a plugin developer to have scripts to build packages for installation on slave nodes. For default template it's better to have something minimalistic and the rest of the tasks commented, otherwise it may create a lot of confusion. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:37

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Talking about templates I mean plugins generated by FBP from the `templates` folder using command you mentioned above. Why not to extend (not replace) template-generated plugins with additional data to provide right coverage? On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Evgeniy L wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

r/is almost a copy-paste/is almost a copy-paste from plugins templates On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Ilya Kutukov wrote: > Igor, i completely agree, actually plugin examples is almost a copy-paste. > > The only thing i see useful in the built plugins example is the

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Ilya, What do you mean by "templates" the plugin which is create by just "fpb --create plugin-name"? It doesn't cover enough, package installation and all range of tasks executions. Thanks, On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Ilya Kutukov wrote: > Igor, i completely agree,

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Igor, i completely agree, actually plugin examples is almost a copy-paste. The only thing i see useful in the built plugins example is the ability to point some code lines, discussing plugin design and writing documentation. Why not to generate this examples automatically from templates? Also,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Overriding and removing VIPs from plugins

Guys, I suppose that any solution for the plugins merge ordering issue (either alerting about error or allowing user to manually set order) would be very helpful and much better then no solution at all (like we currently have). Maybe we should create a blueprint to not miss/forget about it?

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Hi, Plugin examples mustn't be removed, those plugins are part of integration tests for fuel plugin builder, which should be able to build any version of plugin. So there are two ways to solve the problem: 1. Before test run update compatibility matrix for plugins automatically. 2. Continue

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem: Inside VM "fuel-master"

: Samer Machara <samer.mach...@telecom-sudparis.eu> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem: Inside VM &q

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Disable observing modifications of nested fields for MutableDict and MutableList

Fuelers, please notice that the patch [1] changes behaviour of MutableDict and MutableList. observing of changes in nested objects has been disabled, because it is not trivial to handle this case properly. It is much easier to notify about changes in nester fields explicitly when it is

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Disable observing modifications of nested fields for MutableDict and MutableList

Fuelers, please notice that the patch [1] changes behaviour of MutableDict and MutableList. observing of changes in nested objects has been disabled, because it is not trivial to handle this case properly. It is much easier to notify about changes in nester fields explicitly when it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

+1 -- Best regards, Sergii Golovatiuk, Skype #golserge IRC #holser On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Bulat Gaifullin wrote: > +1 > > Regards, > Bulat Gaifullin > Mirantis Inc. > > > > On 03 Mar 2016, at 17:03, Dmitry Klenov wrote: > > Maksim, good

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] UI code freeze

Hi, Thank you for your work, really happy to see it done. So as far as I can see from now on in fuel-web repository we have only Nailgun project. Is it correct? On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov < vkozhuka...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > We are ready for moving

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

+1 Regards, Bulat Gaifullin Mirantis Inc. > On 03 Mar 2016, at 17:03, Dmitry Klenov wrote: > > Maksim, good job! +1 from my side though I am not a core. > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

À: *"Maksim Malchuk" <mmalc...@mirantis.com> >> *Cc: *"Samer Machara" <samer.mach...@telecom-sudparis.eu>, "OpenStack >> Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < >> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> *Envoyé

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

On 2016-03-07 09:49:02 -0800 (-0800), Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > Then that's what we will do, thanks. Also, our official electorate roll generation aggregates potential voter pools on a per-team basis according to definitions in openstack/governance, so may not be fine-grained enough if you

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:37:57AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > >Updated dates based on openstack/election events.yaml: > > > >PTL self-nomination: March 11-17 > >PTL election: March 18-24 > >CL self-nomination: March 25-31 > >CL election: April 1-7 > > > >Can we fit

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-web] Jenkins failing, tox -e py27 error

On 2016-03-07 16:50:00 +0200 (+0200), Igor Kalnitsky wrote: > I got it and I'm working on patch [1] that must solve it. I simply > stop doing postre setup since it seems is already setup. [...] Great! I'd still like to figure out why the job suddenly started assuming the role was missing on the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

*"Maksim Malchuk" <mmalc...@mirantis.com> > *Cc: *"Samer Machara" <samer.mach...@telecom-sudparis.eu>, "OpenStack > Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > *Envoyé: *Lundi 7 Mars 2016 11:21:42

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Yet another example [1] of why a dummy/example plugin should be integrated in the Fuel CI process: the current version of Fuel is broken for (almost) all plugins since a week at least and no one noticed. Regards, Simon [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1554095 On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:16

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-web] Jenkins failing, tox -e py27 error

Hey Jeremy, I got it and I'm working on patch [1] that must solve it. I simply stop doing postre setup since it seems is already setup. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/289278/ On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-03-07 16:02:40 +0530 (+0530),

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-web] Jenkins failing, tox -e py27 error

On 2016-03-07 16:02:40 +0530 (+0530), Prameswar Lal wrote: > I recently started exploring Fuel. Found a small error in documentation but > when i am trying to push the fix, jenkins is throwing following errors: [...] > | Creating role openstack_citest with password > openstack_citest2016-03-07

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

What about maintaining a dummy plugin (eg running only one or two very simple tasks) as a standalone project for the purpose of QA? IMO it would make more sense than having those example plugins in the fuel-plugins project... Regards, Simon On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Igor Kalnitsky

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

> and really lowering barriers for people who just begin create plugins. Nonsense. First, people usually create them via running `fpb --create plugin-name` that generates plugin boilerplate. And that boilerplate won't contain that changes. Second, if people ain't smart enough to change few lines

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] [QA] Major changes in fuel-qa

Hello, Recently system_test framework had changes [0] which incompatible previous test case design. Now it has separate packages for: - actions - contains classes with test actions - core - contains core functionality and decorators - test - contains base test and test cases -

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-web] Jenkins failing, tox -e py27 error

Hey Prameswar, It seems we're experiencing that issue on all our patches. For example, the same error blocks that patch from merge [1]. I think it's some OpenStack CI issue. Let's give a time. - Igor [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287558/ On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Prameswar Lal

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-web] Jenkins failing, tox -e py27 error

Hi All, I recently started exploring Fuel. Found a small error in documentation but when i am trying to push the fix, jenkins is throwing following errors: 2016-03-07 10:05:18.619

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

; >> I'm still waiting >> >> -- >> *De: *"Maksim Malchuk" <mmalc...@mirantis.com> >> *À: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < >> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >&

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Fuel 8 crashes when using Advanced Install

Hi Razvan, could you please provide cmdline which has been passed ? you can get it with simple `cat /proc/cmdline ` in second dracut tab On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Razvan Rosca wrote: > Hey, > > Tried this on 4 Dell machines, issue is present on all. Each server has 2

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: Updated dates based on openstack/election events.yaml: PTL self-nomination: March 11-17 PTL election: March 18-24 CL self-nomination: March 25-31 CL election: April 1-7 Can we fit the component leads election into the same process (i.e. component lead candidates would

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Aleksandra, Very good point on separating the concerns about integration tests for Fuel as a whole and verifying commits to a single component such as fuel-library. In theory, it could support the right balance between stable CI and up-to-date code, but only if we resolve the two remaining

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] Fuel 8 crashes when using Advanced Install

Hey, Tried this on 4 Dell machines, issue is present on all. Each server has 2 SSDs in no RAID. What I'm doing: - mount ISO - select Advanced Install - error ​ Is this a known bug? Thanks, Razvan Rosca Email: raz...@webhipo.com Skype: razvan.rosca Tel.: +4 0731 059 660 Web:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

I think we need to address two separate concerns here: 1) smooth integration of puppet-openstack with Fuel master; 2) tests for changes in fuel-library. For 1) we need to build and test Fuel against master of puppet-openstack and treat any integration issues as critical/blocker. And this is

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Fuel 9.0/Mitaka is now in Feature Freeze

Based on the list of approved exceptions, we're going to be merging some feature changes until March 24. It doesn't make sense to have Soft Code Freeze until a couple of weeks after that, so I propose to shift the release dates by 3 weeks: 9.0 Soft Code Freeze: April 6 9.0 Release: April 20

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Fuel 8.0 is released

No, we have no plans for CentOS 7.x on controllers in Fuel 9.0/Mitaka, and our plans for Newton are still under discussion. I strongly suspect that life cycle management related features will consume most of Fuel team's attention, we've found that problems with the numerous LCM use cases cause a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

t the > script... > > I'm still waiting > > -- > *De: *"Maksim Malchuk" <mmalc...@mirantis.com> > *À: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > *Envoyé: *Vendredi 4 Mars 2016 15:19:5

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 10:34:30AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > >Team, > > > >We're only two weeks away from the beginning of the Newton elections > >period. Based on the Fuel 9.0/Mitaka release schedule [0], I propose the > >following dates for PTL and CL

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

@lists.openstack.org> Envoyé: Vendredi 4 Mars 2016 15:19:54 Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04] Igor, Some information about my system: OS: ubuntu 14.04 LTS Memory: 3,8GiB Samer can't run many guests I think.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

Envoyé: Vendredi 4 Mars 2016 15:19:54 Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04] Igor, Some information about my system: OS: ubuntu 14.04 LTS Memory: 3,8GiB Samer can't run many guests I think. On Fri, Mar 4, 201

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

Igor, Some information about my system: OS: ubuntu 14.04 LTS Memory: 3,8GiB Samer can't run many guests I think. On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Igor Marnat wrote: > Samer, Maksim, > I'd rather say that script started fuel-master already (VM "fuel-master" > has been

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

Samer, Maksim, I'd rather say that script started fuel-master already (VM "fuel-master" has been successfully started.), didn't find running guests, (VBoxManage: error: Guest not running) but it can try to start them afterwards. Samer, - how many VMs are there running besides fuel-master? - is it

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

Hi Sames, *VBoxManage: error: Guest not running* looks line the problem with VirtualBox itself or settings for the 'fuel-master' VM, it can't boot it. Open the VirtualBox Manger (GUI), select the 'fuel-master' VM and start it manually - it should show you what is exactly happens. On Fri, Mar

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Openstack] Instalation Problem:VBoxManage: error: Guest not running [ubuntu14.04]

Hello, everyone. I'm new with Fuel. I'm trying to follow the QuickStart Guide ( https://docs.fuel-infra.org/openstack/fuel/fuel-8.0/quickstart-guide.html ), but I have the following Error: Waiting for VM "fuel-master" to power on... VM "fuel-master" has been successfully started.

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

+1 to maintain example plugins. It is easy enough and really lowering barriers for people who just begin create plugins. On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Matthew Mosesohn wrote: > Igor, > > It seems you are proposing an IKEA approach to plugins. Take Fuel's > example

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Igor, It seems you are proposing an IKEA approach to plugins. Take Fuel's example plugin, add in the current Fuel release, and then build it. We maintained these plugins in the past, but now it should a manual step to test it out on the current release. What would be a more ideal situation that

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

Dmitry, Aleksandra, thank you for help and support! Regards, Igor Marnat On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > As we agreed, we have switched ISO builds to latest CentOS 7.2 snapshots. > > You can see now that each ISO build (see for ex. [1])

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

No, this is a wrong road to go. What if in Fuel 10 we drop v1 plugins support? What should we do? Remove v1 example from source tree? That doesn't seem good to me. Example plugins are only examples. The list of supported releases must be maintained on system test side, and system tests must

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] UI code freeze

Vitaly, As we decided yesterday custom job with fuel-ui and fuel-web refspec parameters could help here. Is it not enough for our case? In general, the case when two PRs depends on each other was deliberately denied to be handled automatically. Please read this thread [1] for details. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Enable UCA repositories for deployment

On 02.03.2016 16:27, Matthew Mosesohn wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to request a feature freeze exception for "Deploy with > UCA packages" feature. > > I anticipate 2 more days to get tests green and add some depth to the > existing test. I vote to support this as that benefits community

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [murano] [yaql] yaql.js

(and thus port YAQL to JS) FYI, you’re not the first one to have that idea. =) We have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/159905/3 an initial draft of how YAQL may look on JS. It’s outdated, but most certainly can be revived and finished if you have interest in helping us make it happen. =) -- 

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Fuel 9.0/Mitaka is now in Feature Freeze

Following feature freeze exceptions were granted, ordered by their merge deadline. See linked emails for additonal conditions attached to some of these exceptions. UCA, 3/10: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/088309.html Multipath disks, 3/10:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] LCM readiness for all deployment tasks

Granted, merge deadline March 15. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:03:11PM +0100, Szymon Banka wrote: > Hi All, > > I’d like to request a Feature Freeze Exception for "LCM readiness for all > deployment tasks” [1] until Mar 11. > > We need additional 1.5 week to finish and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Enable UCA repositories for deployment

Granted, merge deadline March 10. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 06:27:32PM +0300, Matthew Mosesohn wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to request a feature freeze exception for "Deploy with > UCA packages" feature. > > I anticipate 2 more days to get tests green and add some

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE request for osnailyfacter refactoring for Puppet Master compatibility

Granted conditionally, design consensus deadline March 10, merge deadline March 16 for patches that do not conflict with fuel-openstack-tasks and fuel-remove-conflict-openstack, March 24 for remaining patches. If design consensus is not reached by March 10, the exception will be revoked. --

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Unlock Settings Tab

Granted, merge deadline March 24, task history part of the feature is to be excluded from this exception grant unless a consensus is reached by March 10. Relevant part of the meeting log starts at: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/fuel/2016/fuel.2016-03-03-16.00.log.html#l-198 -- Dmitry

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] FF exception request for SR-IOV

Granted, merge deadline March 16, feature to be marked experimental until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 01:40:26PM +0200, Aleksey Kasatkin wrote: > > And we need to write a new patch for: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Component registry improvements

Denied. A fairly large patch with potentially intrusive refactoring that is not required for any other features. We can safely postpone this until Newton. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 11:05:52AM +0200, Andriy Popovych wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to request a feature freeze

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Upgrade][FFE] Reassigning Nodes without Re-Installation

Denied. This came in very late (patch remained in WIP until 1 day before FF), covers a corner case, there was not enough risk analysis, it wasn't represented in the IRC meeting earlier today, and the spec for the high-level feature is sitting with a -1 from fuel-python component lead since 1.5

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Remove conflicting openstack module parts

Granted, merge deadline 3/20. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 11:26:57PM +, Andrew Woodward wrote: > I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for the Remove conflicting > openstack module parts feature [0] > > This is necessary to make the feature Decouple Fuel and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Decouple Fuel and OpenStack tasks

Granted, merge deadline 3/20. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:07:55PM +, Andrew Woodward wrote: > I'd like to request a feature freeze exception for Decouple Fuel and > OpenStack tasks feature [0]. > > While the code change [1] is ready and usually passing CI we have too

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for non-root accounts on slave nodes

Denied. Most of this feature has landed before FF as expected, the rest can wait until Newton. At least, operators who want to disable root access to target nodes are now able to do so, with some exceptions and some additional manual tweaking that we should clean up in the next release. --

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Multi-release packages

Denied. This change is likely to require a Nailgun DB schema change, and can benefit from more design discussions. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 11:00:24PM +0300, Alexey Shtokolov wrote: > Fuelers, > > I would like to request a feature freeze exception for "Multi-release >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for Numa and CPU pinning

Granted, merge deadline March 16, feature to be marked experimental until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:23:08PM +0300, Dmitry Klenov wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Add support for >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] FF exception request for HugePages

Granted, merge deadline March 16, feature to be marked experimental until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:23:06PM +0300, Dmitry Klenov wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to to request a feature freeze exception for "Support for Huge

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] FF exception request for DPDK

Granted, merge deadline March 24, feature to be marked experimental until QA has signed off that it's fully tested and stable. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 05:27:11PM +0300, Vladimir Eremin wrote: > Hi, > > All patches for DPDK feature [1] are on review, new patches are not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

As we agreed, we have switched ISO builds to latest CentOS 7.2 snapshots. You can see now that each ISO build (see for ex. [1]) produces several *_id.txt artifacts. Note that centos_mirror_id.txt points to CentOS snapshot at http://mirror.fuel-infra.org/pkgs/ BVT test is stable, see [2], and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] Use RGW as a default object store instead of Swift

Denied. This is a major functional change and it needs a lot more discussion than a single review posted 2 days before Feature Freeze. Lets start this discussion now, summarize its result in a spec, and see if it's something we want to target for Newton. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Wed, Mar 02,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Add multipath disks support

Granted, merge deadline March 10. On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:27:50PM +0100, Szymon Banka wrote: > Hi All, > > I’d like to request a Feature Freeze Exception for "Add multipath disks > support” until Mar 9. > This feature allows to use FC multipath disks in Fuel nodes – BP [1], spec > [2]. > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Use packetary for building ISO

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 11:21:58PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 03/03/2016 07:14 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev wrote: > > Hello team's , > > Please take in mind my HUGE +1 > > We really need to remove package building process from iso build flow. > Same point of view over here. Let's get rid of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] FFE request for ConfigDB service

Granted, merge deadline March 24, no impact expected in core components (fuel-library, fuel-web, fuel-ui). -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:22:05PM +0300, Oleg Gelbukh wrote: > Greetings, > > As you might know, we are working on centralised storage for > deployment

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

IMHO it is important to keep plugin examples and keep testing them, very valuable for plugin developers. For example, I've encountered [0] the case where "plugin as role" feature wasn't easily testable with fuel-qa because not compliant with the last plugin data structure, and more recently we've

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Matthew Mosesohn wrote: > > Hi Fuelers, > > I would like to bring your attention a dilemma we have here. It seems > that there is a dispute as to whether we should maintain the releases > list for example plugins[0]. In this case, this is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] UI code freeze

Fuel UI code has been completely removed from fuel-web repo and CI jobs to verify fuel-web RR with fuel-ui code and fuel-ui RR with fuel-web code have been set up. So the code separation can be considered as done. Though there is one thing needs to be done and we don't know how to solve that task

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Use packetary for building ISO

On 03/03/2016 07:14 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev wrote: > Hello team's , > Please take in mind my HUGE +1 > We really need to remove package building process from iso build flow. Same point of view over here. Let's get rid of the "make world" approach ASAP. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][FFE] API must allow VIP to be manually set to ANY valid IP address

I'm glad to inform you that all required functionality for the feature was successfully landed into upstream and FFE is not needed anymore. On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Artem Roma wrote: > Colleagues, > I would like to request a feature freeze exception for 'API must

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] FF exception request for DPDK

Hi, All patches for DPDK feature [1] are on review, new patches are not expected: * https://review.openstack.org/286611 Support for DPDK enablement on node interfaces * https://review.openstack.org/284283 Add DPDK support for node interfaces For DPDK bonding [2]: *

[openstack-dev] [fuel][plugins] Should we maintain example plugins?

Hi Fuelers, I would like to bring your attention a dilemma we have here. It seems that there is a dispute as to whether we should maintain the releases list for example plugins[0]. In this case, this is for adding version 9.0 to the list. Right now, we run a swarm test that tries to install the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

Maksim, good job! +1 from my side though I am not a core. On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev < azvyagint...@mirantis.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Aleksandr Didenko > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Kyrylo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

+1 On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Aleksandr Didenko wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Kyrylo Galanov > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Roman Vyalov >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Wed, Mar

[openstack-dev] [Fuel] [Ci] New 'fuel-astute' gate job

Hi to all, please be informed that starting from today we're launching gate job [1] for 'fuel-astute' package [2] Mentioned job will be triggered on each commit and will perform next steps: - build a package from the commit - run system tests scenario [3] with using created package - vote in a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] [FFE] Use packetary for building ISO

Hello team's , Please take in mind my HUGE +1 We really need to remove package building process from iso build flow. On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov < vkozhuka...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Andrew, > > I think everything will be ready by Wednesday 03/09/2016. We have just >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

+1 On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Kyrylo Galanov wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Roman Vyalov wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Sergey Kulanov >> wrote: >> >>> Hey Fuelers, >>> >>> Since

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Maksim Malchuk for the fuel-virtualbox-core team

+1 On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Roman Vyalov wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Sergey Kulanov > wrote: > >> Hey Fuelers, >> >> Since we've successfully moved [1] virtual-box scripts from fuel-main [2] >> to >> separate

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: Team, We're only two weeks away from the beginning of the Newton elections period. Based on the Fuel 9.0/Mitaka release schedule [0], I propose the following dates for PTL and CL self-nomination and election periods: PTL self-nomination: March 13-20 PTL election: March

[openstack-dev] [fuel] Fuel 9.0/Mitaka is now in Feature Freeze

Feature Freeze [0] for Fuel 9.0/Mitaka is now in effect. From this moment and until stable/mitaka branch is created at Soft Code Freeze, please do not merge feature related changes that have not received a feature freeze exception. [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/FeatureFreeze We will

[openstack-dev] [fuel] Newton PTL and CL elections

Team, We're only two weeks away from the beginning of the Newton elections period. Based on the Fuel 9.0/Mitaka release schedule [0], I propose the following dates for PTL and CL self-nomination and election periods: PTL self-nomination: March 13-20 PTL election: March 21-27 CL self-nomination:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

Thanks for the detailed explanation, very helpful! Considering that this change is atomic and easily revertable, lets proceed with the change, the sooner we do that the more time we'll have to confirm that there is no impact and revert if necessary. -- Dmitry Borodaenko On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

Hi, let me add some details about the change: 1) There are two repositories used to build Fuel ISO: base OS repository [1], and mos repository [2], where we put Fuel dependencies and packages we rebuild due to certain version requirements. The CentOS 7.2 feature is related to the upstream repo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

It is not just about BVT. I'd suggest to monitor situation overall, including failures of system tests [1]. If we see regressions there, or some test cases will start flapping (what is even worse), then we'd have to revert back to CentOS 7.1. [1] https://github.com/openstack/fuel-qa On Wed, Mar

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Feature Freeze Exception Request - switching to CentOS-7.2

I agree with Mike's concerns, and propose to make these limitations (4 weeks before FF for OS upgrades, 2 weeks for upgrades of key dependencies -- RabbitMQ, MCollective, Puppet, MySQL, PostgreSQL, anything else?) official for 10.0/Newton. For 9.0/Mitaka, it is too late to impose them, so we

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >