Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] A culture change (nitpicking)

For me nitpicking during review is really not a good experience, however i do think we should tolerate at least one round of nitpicking. On another aspect, the nitpicking review culture also in some way encourage, and provide legitimacy in some way, to the padding activities. People are feeling

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Organizational diversity tag

I agree with Zane's proposal here, it is a good rule to have 2 core reviewer from different companies to provide +2 for a patch. However it should not be very strict given that project in early stage usually have to rely on devs from one or two companies. But it should be recommended that project

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [placement] cinder + placement forum session etherpad

On Wed, 9 May 2018, Chris Dent wrote: I've started an etherpad for the forum session in Vancouver devoted to discussing the possibility of tracking and allocation resources in Cinder using the Placement service. This is not a done deal. Instead the session is to discuss if it could work and how

[openstack-dev] [keystone] Keystone Team Update - Week of 28 May 2018

# Keystone Team Update - Week of 28 May 2018 ## News ### Summit Recap We had a productive summit last week. Lance has posted a recap[1]. [1] https://www.lbragstad.com/blog/openstack-summit-vancouver-recap ### Quota Models There was a productive discussion at the forum on hierarchical quotas

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

> FWIW, I don't have a problem with the virt driver "knowing about > allocations". What I have a problem with is the virt driver *claiming > resources for an instance*. +1000. > That's what the whole placement claims resources things was all about, > and I'm not interested in stepping back to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Organizational diversity tag

On 01/06/18 12:18, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2018-06-01 10:10:31 -0400: Crazy idea: what if we dropped the idea of measuring the diversity and allowed teams to decide when they applied the tag to themselves like we do for other tags. (No wait! Come back!) Some

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

On 06/01/2018 03:02 PM, Dan Smith wrote: Dan, you are leaving out the parts of my response where I am agreeing with you and saying that your "Option #2" is probably the things we should go with. No, what you said was: I would vote for Option #2 if it comes down to it. Implying (to me at

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

> Dan, you are leaving out the parts of my response where I am agreeing > with you and saying that your "Option #2" is probably the things we > should go with. No, what you said was: >> I would vote for Option #2 if it comes down to it. Implying (to me at least) that you still weren't in favor

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

On 05/31/2018 02:26 PM, Eric Fried wrote: 1. Make everything perform the pivot on compute node start (which can be re-used by a CLI tool for the offline case) 2. Make everything default to non-nested inventory at first, and provide a way to migrate a compute node and its instances one at

Re: [openstack-dev] [DragonFlow][TC] State of the DragonFlow project

On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:29:41PM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > That presentation says "Users should do their own tagging/release > management" (6:31). I don't think that's really an approach we want > to be encouraging project teams to take. > I hadn't had a chance to watch the presentation

Re: [openstack-dev] [DragonFlow][TC] State of the DragonFlow project

That presentation says "Users should do their own tagging/release management" (6:31). I don't think that's really an approach we want to be encouraging project teams to take. I would suggest placing Dragonflow in maintenance mode, but if the team doesn't have the resources to participate in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

Dan, you are leaving out the parts of my response where I am agreeing with you and saying that your "Option #2" is probably the things we should go with. -jay On 06/01/2018 12:22 PM, Dan Smith wrote: So, you're saying the normal process is to try upgrading the Linux kernel and associated

Re: [openstack-dev] [rally][tc] Tagging rights

Excerpts from Sean McGinnis's message of 2018-06-01 11:45:04 -0500: > Hi Andrey, > > Sorry for the delay getting back to this. I had meant to wait for the > responses > from the other projects included in the original thread, but never made it > back > to follow up. > > Officially governed

Re: [openstack-dev] [rally][tc] Tagging rights

Hi Andrey, Sorry for the delay getting back to this. I had meant to wait for the responses from the other projects included in the original thread, but never made it back to follow up. Officially governed projects are required to use the releases repo for driving the automated release process.

Re: [openstack-dev] [DragonFlow][TC] State of the DragonFlow project

There was an project update presentation in Vancouver: https://www.openstack.org/videos/vancouver-2018/dragonflow-project-update-2 On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > Hello DragonFlow team, > > As part of reviewing release activities it was noticed that there was > never a >

Re: [openstack-dev] [StarlingX] StarlingX code followup discussions

Josh, The Kata team is talking to QEMU maintainers about how best to move forward. Specially around stripping down things that's not needed for their use case. They are not adding code from what i got to know (just removing stuff). -- Dims On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote:

[openstack-dev] [DragonFlow][TC] State of the DragonFlow project

Hello DragonFlow team, As part of reviewing release activities it was noticed that there was never a final Queens release for DragonFlow and there was never a stable/queens branch created. It appears there is still activity with this project [1], so I am wondering if we could get an update on

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

> So, you're saying the normal process is to try upgrading the Linux > kernel and associated low-level libs, wait the requisite amount of > time that takes (can be a long time) and just hope that everything > comes back OK? That doesn't sound like any upgrade I've ever seen. I'm saying I think

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Organizational diversity tag

Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2018-06-01 10:10:31 -0400: > On 26/05/18 17:46, Mohammed Naser wrote: > > Hi everyone! > > > > During the TC retrospective at the OpenStack summit last week, the > > topic of the organizational diversity tag is becoming irrelevant was > > brought up by

Re: [openstack-dev] [StarlingX] StarlingX code followup discussions

Slightly off topic but, Have you by any chance looked at what kata has forked for qemu: https://github.com/kata-containers/qemu/tree/qemu-lite-2.11.0 I'd be interested in an audit of that code for similar reasons to this libvirt fork (hard to know from my view point if there are new issues in

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat][neutron] Extraroute support

The neutron API now supports compare and swap updates with an If-Match header so the race condition can be avoided. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1703234 On Fri, Jun 1, 2018, 04:57 Rabi Mishra wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Lajos Katona > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Could

[openstack-dev] [mistral] Mistral Monthly June 2018

Hey Mistralites! Welcome to the second edition of Mistral Monthly. # Summit Brad Crochet done a great job giving the Mistral project update talk. Check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9qieruccO4 Also checkout the Congress update, they discuss their recent support for Mistral.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] Upgrade concerns with nested Resource Providers

Sylvain- On 05/31/2018 02:41 PM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:26 PM, Eric Fried > wrote: > > > 1. Make everything perform the pivot on compute node start (which can be > >    re-used by a CLI tool for the offline case) > > 2. Make

Re: [openstack-dev] Updated PTI for documentation

On 2018-06-01 14:58:02 +0100 (+0100), Stephen Finucane wrote: [...] > * The recent move to zuul v3 has changed how documentation is built in >the gate. Previously, zuul called the 'docs' target in tox (e.g. >'tox -e docs'), which would run whatever the project team had >defined for

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Organizational diversity tag

On 26/05/18 17:46, Mohammed Naser wrote: Hi everyone! During the TC retrospective at the OpenStack summit last week, the topic of the organizational diversity tag is becoming irrelevant was brought up by Thierry (ttx)[1]. It seems that for projects that are not very active, they can easily

[openstack-dev] Updated PTI for documentation

There have been a couple of threads about an updated "PTI" for documentation bouncing around the mailing list of late. * http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128817 .html * http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128594 .html I've been told

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][glance] Deprecation of nova.image.download.modules extension point

On 6/1/2018 12:44 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 05/31/2018 04:14 PM, Curt Moore wrote: >> The challenge is that transferring the Glance image transfer is >> _glacially slow_ when using the Glance HTTP API (~30 min for a 50GB >> Windows image (It’s Windows, it’s huge with all of the necessary >>

Re: [openstack-dev] Questions about token scopes

It looks like I had a patch up to improve some developer documentation that is relevant to this discussion [0]. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/554727/ On 06/01/2018 08:01 AM, Jens Harbott wrote: > 2018-05-30 20:37 GMT+00:00 Matt Riedemann : >> On 5/30/2018 9:53 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote:

[openstack-dev] [osc][python-openstackclient] osc-included image signing

Hi, our team has implemented a prototype for an osc-included image signing. We would like to propose a spec or something like this, but haven't found where to start at. So here is a brief concept of what we want to contribute: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/osc-included_image_signing Please

Re: [openstack-dev] Questions about token scopes

2018-05-30 20:37 GMT+00:00 Matt Riedemann : > On 5/30/2018 9:53 AM, Lance Bragstad wrote: >> >> While scope isn't explicitly denoted by an >> attribute, it can be derived from the attributes of the token response. >> > > Yeah, this was confusing to me, which is why I reported it as a bug in the >

Re: [openstack-dev] [StarlingX] StarlingX code followup discussions

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 01:54:59PM -0500, Dean Troyer wrote: > StarlingX (aka STX) was announced this week at the summit, there is a > PR to create project repos in Gerrit at [0]. STX is basically Wind From a cursory look at the libvirt fork, there are some questionable choices. E.g. the config

Re: [openstack-dev] [heat][neutron] Extraroute support

On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Lajos Katona wrote: > Hi, > > Could somebody help me out with Neutron's Extraroute support in Hot > templates. > The support status of the Extraroute is support.UNSUPPORTED in heat, and > only create and delete are the supported operations. > see:

[openstack-dev] [manila] Core team updates

Hi all, Clinton Knight and Valeriy Ponomaryov have been focusing on projects outside Manila for some time so I'm removing them from the core team. Valeriy and Clinton made great contributions to Manila over the years both as reviewers and as contributors. We are fortunate to have been able

[openstack-dev] [heat][neutron] Extraroute support

Hi, Could somebody help me out with Neutron's Extraroute support in Hot templates. The support status of the Extraroute is support.UNSUPPORTED in heat, and only create and delete are the supported operations. see:

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

+1 On 31/05/18 18:02, Borne Mace wrote: Greetings all, I would like to propose the addition of Steve Noyes to the kolla-cli core reviewer team.  Consider this nomination as my personal +1. Steve has a long history with the kolla-cli and should be considered its co-creator as probably half

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] CD tangent - was: A culture change (nitpicking)

Quoting Sean McGinnis (2018-05-31 09:54:46) > On 05/31/2018 03:50 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Right... There might be a reasonable middle ground between "every > > commit on master must be backward-compatible" and "rip out all > > testing" that allows us to routinely revert broken feature

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

+1 > On 31. May 2018, at 19:02, Borne Mace wrote: > > Greetings all, > > I would like to propose the addition of Steve Noyes to the kolla-cli core > reviewer team. Consider this nomination as my personal +1. > > Steve has a long history with the kolla-cli and should be considered its >

Re: [openstack-dev] [StarlingX] StarlingX code followup discussions

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:41:18PM -0400, Brian Haley wrote: > On 05/22/2018 04:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: [...] > > Please don't take this the wrong way, Dean, but you aren't seriously > > suggesting that anyone outside of Windriver/Intel would ever contribute > > to these repos are you? > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

+1 On 1 June 2018 at 08:55, Eduardo Gonzalez wrote: > +1 > > 2018-06-01 8:57 GMT+02:00 Michał Jastrzębski : > >> +1 from me:) >> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018, 11:40 PM Martin André wrote: >> >>> If Steve wrote half of kolla-cli then it's a no brainer to me. +1! >>> >>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:02

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

+1 2018-06-01 8:57 GMT+02:00 Michał Jastrzębski : > +1 from me:) > > On Thu, May 31, 2018, 11:40 PM Martin André wrote: > >> If Steve wrote half of kolla-cli then it's a no brainer to me. +1! >> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Borne Mace >> wrote: >> > Greetings all, >> > >> > I would like

Re: [openstack-dev] [Summit][qa] Vancouver Summit 2018 QA Recap

Hello Ghanshyam, Thanks for putting this all together. Great summary :-) On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Ghanshyam wrote: > Hi All, > > We had another good Summit in Vancouver and got good amount of feedback for > QA which really important and helpful. > I am summarizing the QA discussions

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

+1 from me:) On Thu, May 31, 2018, 11:40 PM Martin André wrote: > If Steve wrote half of kolla-cli then it's a no brainer to me. +1! > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Borne Mace wrote: > > Greetings all, > > > > I would like to propose the addition of Steve Noyes to the kolla-cli core > >

[openstack-dev] [Summit][qa] Vancouver Summit 2018 QA Recap

Hi All, We had another good Summit in Vancouver and got good amount of feedback for QA which really important and helpful. I am summarizing the QA discussions during Summit. QA feedback sessions: = Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR18-forum-qa-ops-user-feedback We

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] Nominating Steve Noyes for kolla-cli core reviewer

If Steve wrote half of kolla-cli then it's a no brainer to me. +1! On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Borne Mace wrote: > Greetings all, > > I would like to propose the addition of Steve Noyes to the kolla-cli core > reviewer team. Consider this nomination as my personal +1. > > Steve has a long

Re: [openstack-dev] Questions about token scopes

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: > > > On 05/31/2018 12:09 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:53 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote: >>> >>> On 05/30/2018 08:47 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: I know the keystone team has been doing a lot of work on scoped tokens