Morgan Fainberg writes:
> As I have been converting Zuul and NodePool to python3, I have had to do a
> bunch of changes around encode() and decode() of strings since gear is
> (properly) an implementation of a protocol that requires binary data
> (rather than text_strings).
>
> What this has high
Hi everybody,
On 1 July 2016 at 20:00 UTC Gerrit will be unavailable for
approximately 120 minutes (2 hours) while we upgrade
zuul.openstack.org and static.openstack.org to Ubuntu Trusty.
During this time, running jobs will be stopped as both new servers for
zuul.openstack.org and static.openstac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Everyone,
It was recently discovered that our puppet-gerrit module configures
Gerrit in a way which makes it vulnerable to a XSS attack. This stems
from our configuration marking text/html as a 'safe' mimetype[1].
This configuration change was f
On 06/20/2016 09:22 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2016-06-08 23:08:16 +1000 (+1000), Joshua Hesketh wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Store Build Logs in Swift
>> [...]
>>> We should remove the original spec from our priority list (since
>>> that's basic
On 2016-06-21 17:34:07 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2016-06-21 18:16:49 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > It hurts a lot when it's down because of so many services being served from
> > it. We could also separate the published websites (status.o.o,
> > governance.o.o, security.o
On 2016-06-21 18:16:49 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote:
> It hurts a lot when it's down because of so many services being served from
> it. We could also separate the published websites (status.o.o,
> governance.o.o, security.o.o, releases.o.o...) which require limited
> resources and grow slow
Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-06-21 17:22:15 +1000 (+1000), Joshua Hesketh wrote:
Good update, thanks fungi.
Just a thought, given the pain we felt yesterday when static.o.o was down,
we should consider if a log solution needs to be a priority. Using afs (or
swift) could allow us to scale stati
On 2016-06-21 17:22:15 +1000 (+1000), Joshua Hesketh wrote:
> Good update, thanks fungi.
>
> Just a thought, given the pain we felt yesterday when static.o.o was down,
> we should consider if a log solution needs to be a priority. Using afs (or
> swift) could allow us to scale static.o.o horizonta
Good update, thanks fungi.
Just a thought, given the pain we felt yesterday when static.o.o was down,
we should consider if a log solution needs to be a priority. Using afs (or
swift) could allow us to scale static.o.o horizontally.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2
