From rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com Tue Jul 3 06:14:13 2018 From: rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com (Rico Lin) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:14:13 +0800 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [self-healing][openstack-dev][heat][vitrage][mistral] Self-Healing with Vitrage, Heat, and Mistral Message-ID: Dear all Back to Vancouver Summit, Ifat brings out the idea of integrating Heat, Vitrage, and Mistral to bring better self-healing scenario. For previous works, There already works cross Heat, Mistral, and Zaqar for self-healing [1]. And there is works cross Vitrage, and Mistral [2]. Now we plan to start working on integrating two works (as much as it can/should be) and to make sure the scenario works and keep it working. The integrated scenario flow will look something like this: An existing monitor detect host/network failure and send an alarm to Vitrage -> Vitrage deduces that the instance is down (based on the topology and based on Vitrage templates [2]) -> Vitrage triggers Mistral to fix the instance -> application is recovered We created an Etherpad [3] to document all discussion/feedbacks/plans (and will add more detail through time) Also, create a story in self-healing SIG to track all task. The current plans are: - A spec for Vitrage resources in Heat [5] - Create Vitrage resources in Heat - Write Heat Template and Vitrage Template for this scenario - A tempest task for above scenario - Add periodic job for this scenario (with above task). The best place to host this job (IMO) is under self-healing SIG To create a periodic job for self-healing sig means we might also need a place to manage those self-healing tempest test. For this scenario, I think it will make sense if we use heat-tempest-plugin to store that scenario test (since it will wrap as a Heat template) or use vitrage-tempest-plugin (since most of the test scenario are actually already there). Not sure what will happen if we create a new tempest plugin for self-healing and no manager for it. We still got some uncertainty to clear during working on it, but the big picture looks like all will works(if we doing all well on above tasks). Please provide your feedback or question if you have any. We do needs feedbacks and reviews on patches or any works. If you're interested in this, please join us (we need users/ops/devs!). [1] https://github.com/openstack/heat-templates/tree/master/hot/autohealing [2] https://github.com/openstack/self-healing-sig/blob/master/specs/vitrage-mistral-integration.rst [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/self-healing-with-vitrage-mistral-heat [4] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2002684 [5] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578786 -- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, *Rico Lin*irc: ricolin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martialmichel at datamachines.io Tue Jul 3 20:34:54 2018 From: martialmichel at datamachines.io (Martial Michel) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 16:34:54 -0400 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [Scientific] No Scientific SIG meeting on July 4th Message-ID: We will skip this week's Scientific SIG IRC meeting (originally scheduled for 2018-07-04 1100 UTC in channel #openstack-meeting). For my colleagues located in the USA, Happy July 4th! -- Martial -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cdent+os at anticdent.org Thu Jul 5 17:05:39 2018 From: cdent+os at anticdent.org (Chris Dent) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 18:05:39 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [all][api] POST /api-sig/news Message-ID: Greetings OpenStack community, At today's meeting we discussed an issue that came up on a nova/placement review [9] wherein there was some indecision about whether a response code of 400 or 404 is more appropriate when a path segement expects a UUID, the request doesn't supply something that is actually a UUID, and the method being used on the URI may be creating a resource. We agreed with the earlier discussion that a 400 was approrpiate in this narrow case. Other cases may be different. With that warm up exercise out of the way, we moved on to discussing pending guidelines, freezing one of them [10] and declaring that another [11] required a followup to clarify the format of strings codes used in error responses. After that, we did some group learning about StoryBoard [8]. This is becoming something of a regular activity. As always if you're interested in helping out, in addition to coming to the meetings, there's also: * The list of bugs [5] indicates several missing or incomplete guidelines. * The existing guidelines [2] always need refreshing to account for changes over time. If you find something that's not quite right, submit a patch [6] to fix it. * Have you done something for which you think guidance would have made things easier but couldn't find any? Submit a patch and help others [6]. # Newly Published Guidelines None # API Guidelines Proposed for Freeze Guidelines that are ready for wider review by the whole community. * Expand error code document to expect clarity https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577118/ # Guidelines Currently Under Review [3] * Add links to errors-example.json https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578369/ * Update parameter names in microversion sdk spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/557773/ * Add API-schema guide (still being defined) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/524467/ * A (shrinking) suite of several documents about doing version and service discovery Start at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459405/ * WIP: microversion architecture archival doc (very early; not yet ready for review) https://review.openstack.org/444892 # Highlighting your API impacting issues If you seek further review and insight from the API SIG about APIs that you are developing or changing, please address your concerns in an email to the OpenStack developer mailing list[1] with the tag "[api]" in the subject. In your email, you should include any relevant reviews, links, and comments to help guide the discussion of the specific challenge you are facing. To learn more about the API SIG mission and the work we do, see our wiki page [4] and guidelines [2]. Thanks for reading and see you next week! # References [1] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/ [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/api-wg,n,z [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_SIG [5] https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg [6] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/api-wg [7] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-June/131881.html [8] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/1039 [9] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/580373/ [10] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577118/ [11] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578369/ Meeting Agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-SIG#Agenda Past Meeting Records http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/api_sig/ Open Bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent From chengfeiyoiua at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 15:09:00 2018 From: chengfeiyoiua at gmail.com (TING PANG) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 23:09:00 +0800 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [security] Unified Trust Management in Cloud Message-ID: Dear all, Nice to e-meet you. I come from Huawei Technologies and mainly engaged in cloud security work. As we all know, trusted computing is a security technology and many cloud service providers publish their trusted computing solutions to secure the cloud computing environment. However, there are several mainstream trusted computing formats (e.g. TPM/TCM) and there is no unified solution to be compatible with these formats, which causes the huge development costs and interoperability issues to vendors for supporting them. Fortunately, there is a standard ISO/IEC 27070 that provides a high level architecture for being compatible with mainstream trusted computing formats in cloud environment, which can reduce the huge development costs and the risk of entering other markets to vendors. In order to achieve this standard, we have an idea that provide a general unified trust management framework for VMs in OpenStack. More general information can be found here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MOvkqdYgoMDcf3B8Sb6Bx3qR6ZrBz-kJT7gpKUxudRc/edit?usp=sharing Please feel free to contact me if you are interested in this idea or have questions.JJ Best regards, Ting -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fungi at yuggoth.org Tue Jul 10 18:56:18 2018 From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 18:56:18 +0000 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [first-contact] Forum summary on recommendations for contributing organizations In-Reply-To: <20180612195325.lr364w6skajhhtow@yuggoth.org> References: <20180612195325.lr364w6skajhhtow@yuggoth.org> Message-ID: <20180710185618.gzfzx3sz2oeszj7q@yuggoth.org> On 2018-06-12 19:53:25 +0000 (+0000), Jeremy Stanley wrote: [...] > Finally, we came up with a handful of action items. One was me > sending this summary (only a couple weeks late!), another was > Matthew Oliver submitting a patch to the contributor guide repo > with our initial stub text. [...] An early draft for the Contributor Guide addition with recommendations to contributing organizations was subsequently proposed as https://review.openstack.org/578676 but could use some additional input and polish from other interested members of the community. Please have a look and provide any feedback you have as review comments there or via followup to this thread (whichever is more convenient). -- Jeremy Stanley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Tue Jul 10 20:01:19 2018 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:01:19 -0500 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [first-contact] Forum summary on recommendations for contributing organizations In-Reply-To: <20180710185618.gzfzx3sz2oeszj7q@yuggoth.org> References: <20180612195325.lr364w6skajhhtow@yuggoth.org> <20180710185618.gzfzx3sz2oeszj7q@yuggoth.org> Message-ID: Cross posting this to the dev-list as I think there will be good input from there as well :) -Kendall (diablo_rojo) On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:56 AM Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2018-06-12 19:53:25 +0000 (+0000), Jeremy Stanley wrote: > [...] > > Finally, we came up with a handful of action items. One was me > > sending this summary (only a couple weeks late!), another was > > Matthew Oliver submitting a patch to the contributor guide repo > > with our initial stub text. > [...] > > An early draft for the Contributor Guide addition with > recommendations to contributing organizations was subsequently > proposed as https://review.openstack.org/578676 but could use some > additional input and polish from other interested members of the > community. Please have a look and provide any feedback you have as > review comments there or via followup to this thread (whichever is > more convenient). > -- > Jeremy Stanley > _______________________________________________ > openstack-sigs mailing list > openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-sigs > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stig.openstack at telfer.org Tue Jul 10 20:32:45 2018 From: stig.openstack at telfer.org (Stig Telfer) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 22:32:45 +0200 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [scientific] IRC meeting 2100 UTC: Berlin CFP, controlled-access data Message-ID: <2FD9B6D4-7D49-4752-A51E-1CFEFF9E6951@telfer.org> Hi All - We have an IRC meeting at 2100 UTC - about 30 minutes time. Today I’d like to discuss more about community-wide approaches to handling controlled-access data (eg, medical informatics) and to remind people of the up-coming CFP for the Berlin summit. If there’s time we might also discuss France vs Belgium. The IRC meeting will be in channel #openstack-meeting. Everyone is welcome. Cheers, Stig From rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com Wed Jul 11 12:50:32 2018 From: rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com (Rico Lin) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:50:32 +0800 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [self-healing][all] Expose SIG to user/ops Message-ID: Hi all As we went through some discussion form Summit for self-healing sig, To collect Use case is one of our goal in Rocky cycle. Keep thinking how can we expose This SIG to users/ops and make this become a regular thing. Here's some idea that might help, also might be able to help other SIG as well: ** Join user survey:* It's possible for SIG to propose options in User survey. If we going to do so, we should provide questions which can be answered by selecting from options or let's said minimal written is preferred. So what will the question be? Would like to hear from everyone for any idea. ** Expose our StoryBoard to user/ops* Another idea is to expose our StoryBoard to user/ops. OpenStack community currently didn't have any effective way to raise issues for self-healing. If we expose StoryBoard to user/ops to allow them to raise issues, users can directly file the entire story, instead of just reporting part of the issue and that usually reply with `Oh, that's XXX project's issue, we got nothing to do with it`. Don't get this wrong, we got nothing to block user to raise story(issues) in any project, including self-healing SIG. But I believe to specific tell user where you can drop that story to trigger cross-project discussions will be the right way instead of telling nothing and user not even know any valid way to deal with issues. Imaging that when you first join a community, there is a line tell you if you have a question about self-healing/k8s/upgrade/etc here is where you can raise the issue, and find help. I will imagine we need to have people from teams to be around to deal with issues and tell users/ops when they come. But for what I know, we actually got attention from most of teams that concerns about self-healing. I think in order to do so (if that's a good idea), we need someplace better than ML to tell users/ops that here is where you can go when you found your self-healing not working or you need any help. Also, I think this might actually apply to other SIGs. ** Build gate job for self-healing task* We have some use cases that already been demo around self-healing cases, like Vitrage+Mistral, Heat+Mistral+Aodh, etc. Also, some scenarios are under development. I believe there are values to generate a periodic task, or even a cross-project gate to make sure we didn't break the general self-healing use cases. If we can do so, I think users/ops will have the better confidence to say self-healing is absolutely working in OpenStack. Also, we don't need to build separate tempest plugin if we can find any projects willing to host those test. Not speaking for the entire team, but I think Heat might be able to provide something here. Those are my proposal, please help to give your opinions. Thanks all. -- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, *Rico Lin*irc: ricolin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msm at redhat.com Thu Jul 12 16:31:21 2018 From: msm at redhat.com (Michael McCune) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 12:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [all][api] POST /api-sig/news Message-ID: Greetings OpenStack community, Today's meeting was very brief as both cdent and dtantsur were out. There were no major items of discussion, but we did acknowledge the efforts of the GraphQL proof of concept work[7] being led by Gilles Dubreuil. This work continues to make progress and should provide an interesting data point for the possibiity of future GraphQL usages. In addition to the light discussion there was also one guideline update that was merged this week, and a small infrastructure-related patch that was merged. As always if you're interested in helping out, in addition to coming to the meetings, there's also: * The list of bugs [5] indicates several missing or incomplete guidelines. * The existing guidelines [2] always need refreshing to account for changes over time. If you find something that's not quite right, submit a patch [6] to fix it. * Have you done something for which you think guidance would have made things easier but couldn't find any? Submit a patch and help others [6]. # Newly Published Guidelines * Expand error code document to expect clarity https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577118/ # API Guidelines Proposed for Freeze Guidelines that are ready for wider review by the whole community. None # Guidelines Currently Under Review [3] * Add links to errors-example.json https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578369/ * Update parameter names in microversion sdk spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/557773/ * Add API-schema guide (still being defined) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/524467/ * A (shrinking) suite of several documents about doing version and service discovery Start at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459405/ * WIP: microversion architecture archival doc (very early; not yet ready for review) https://review.openstack.org/444892 # Highlighting your API impacting issues If you seek further review and insight from the API SIG about APIs that you are developing or changing, please address your concerns in an email to the OpenStack developer mailing list[1] with the tag "[api]" in the subject. In your email, you should include any relevant reviews, links, and comments to help guide the discussion of the specific challenge you are facing. To learn more about the API SIG mission and the work we do, see our wiki page [4] and guidelines [2]. Thanks for reading and see you next week! # References [1] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/ [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/api-wg,n,z [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_SIG [5] https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg [6] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/api-wg [7] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2002782 Meeting Agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-SIG#Agenda Past Meeting Records http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/api_sig/ Open Bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg From cdent+os at anticdent.org Thu Jul 19 16:33:07 2018 From: cdent+os at anticdent.org (Chris Dent) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 17:33:07 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [all][api] POST /api-sig/news Message-ID: Greetings OpenStack community, Today's meeting was again very brief as this time elmiko and dtantsur were out. There were no major items of discussion, but we made plans to check on the status of the GraphQL prototyping (Hi! How's it going?). In addition to the light discussion there was also one guideline that was frozen for wider review and a new one introduced (see below). Both are realted to the handling of the "code" attribute in error responses. As always if you're interested in helping out, in addition to coming to the meetings, there's also: * The list of bugs [5] indicates several missing or incomplete guidelines. * The existing guidelines [2] always need refreshing to account for changes over time. If you find something that's not quite right, submit a patch [6] to fix it. * Have you done something for which you think guidance would have made things easier but couldn't find any? Submit a patch and help others [6]. # Newly Published Guidelines * Expand error code document to expect clarity https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577118/ # API Guidelines Proposed for Freeze Guidelines that are ready for wider review by the whole community. * Add links to errors-example.json https://review.openstack.org/#/c/578369/ # Guidelines Currently Under Review [3] * Expand schema for error.codes to reflect reality https://review.openstack.org/#/c/580703/ * Update parameter names in microversion sdk spec https://review.openstack.org/#/c/557773/ * Add API-schema guide (still being defined) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/524467/ * A (shrinking) suite of several documents about doing version and service discovery Start at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459405/ * WIP: microversion architecture archival doc (very early; not yet ready for review) https://review.openstack.org/444892 # Highlighting your API impacting issues If you seek further review and insight from the API SIG about APIs that you are developing or changing, please address your concerns in an email to the OpenStack developer mailing list[1] with the tag "[api]" in the subject. In your email, you should include any relevant reviews, links, and comments to help guide the discussion of the specific challenge you are facing. To learn more about the API SIG mission and the work we do, see our wiki page [4] and guidelines [2]. Thanks for reading and see you next week! # References [1] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/ [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/api-wg,n,z [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_SIG [5] https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg [6] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/api-wg Meeting Agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-SIG#Agenda Past Meeting Records http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/api_sig/ Open Bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-wg -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent From tony at bakeyournoodle.com Fri Jul 20 03:05:26 2018 From: tony at bakeyournoodle.com (Tony Breeds) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:05:26 +1000 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [stable][meta] Proposing Retiring the Stable Branch project Message-ID: <20180720030525.GC30070@thor.bakeyournoodle.com> team and Opening the Extended Maintenance SIG Reply-To: Hello folks, So really the subject says it all. I fell like at the time we created the Stable branch project team that was the only option. Since then we have crated the SIG structure and in my opinion that's a better fit. We've also transition from 'Stable Branch Maintenance' to 'Extended Maintenance' Being a SIG will make it explicit that we *need* operator, user and developer contributions. Yours Tony. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tony at bakeyournoodle.com Fri Jul 20 03:08:00 2018 From: tony at bakeyournoodle.com (Tony Breeds) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:08:00 +1000 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [openstack-dev] [stable][meta] Proposing Retiring the Stable Branch project In-Reply-To: <20180720030525.GC30070@thor.bakeyournoodle.com> References: <20180720030525.GC30070@thor.bakeyournoodle.com> Message-ID: <20180720030800.GD30070@thor.bakeyournoodle.com> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:05:26PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > > Hello folks, > So really the subject says it all. I fell like at the time we > created the Stable branch project team that was the only option. Since > then we have crated the SIG structure and in my opinion that's a better > fit. We've also transition from 'Stable Branch Maintenance' to > 'Extended Maintenance' > > Being a SIG will make it explicit that we *need* operator, user and > developer contributions. I meant to say I've created: https://review.openstack.org/584205 and https://review.openstack.org/584206 To make this transition. Thoughts? Yours Tony. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: not available URL: From thierry at openstack.org Fri Jul 20 14:44:35 2018 From: thierry at openstack.org (Thierry Carrez) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 16:44:35 +0200 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [all] [ptg] PTG track schedule published Message-ID: Hi everyone, Last month we published the tentative schedule layout for the 5 days of PTG. There was no major complaint, so that was confirmed as the PTG event schedule and published on the PTG website: https://www.openstack.org/ptg#tab_schedule You'll notice that: - The Ops meetup days were added. - Keystone track is split in two: one day on Monday for cross-project discussions around identity management, and two days on Thursday/Friday for team discussions. - The "Ask me anything" project helproom on Monday/Tuesday is for horizontal support teams (infrastructure, release management, stable maint, requirements...) to provide support for other teams, SIGs and workgroups and answer their questions. Goal champions should also be available there to help with Stein goal completion questions. - Like in Dublin, a number of tracks do not get pre-allocated time, and will be scheduled on the spot in available rooms at the time that makes the most sense for the participants. - Every track will be able to book extra time and space in available extra rooms at the event. To find more information about the event, register or book a room at the event hotel, visit: https://www.openstack.org/ptg Note that the second (and last) round of applications for travel support to the event is closing at the end of next week (July 29th) ! Apply if you need financial help attending the event: https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/travelsupportptg_denver_2018 See you there ! -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) From thierry at openstack.org Fri Jul 20 14:57:20 2018 From: thierry at openstack.org (Thierry Carrez) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 16:57:20 +0200 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [all] [ptg] PTG track schedule published In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Last month we published the tentative schedule layout for the 5 days of > PTG. There was no major complaint, so that was confirmed as the PTG > event schedule and published on the PTG website: > > https://www.openstack.org/ptg#tab_schedule The tab temporarily disappeared, while it is being restored you can access the schedule at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRM2UIbpnL3PumLjRaso_9qpOfnyV9VrPqGbTXiMVNbVgjiR3SIdl8VSBefk339MhrbJO5RficKt2Rr/pubhtml?gid=1156322660&single=true -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) From zhipengh512 at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 06:58:59 2018 From: zhipengh512 at gmail.com (Zhipeng Huang) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:58:59 +0800 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [publiccloud-wg]New Meeting Time Starting This Week Message-ID: Hi Folks, As indicated in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/584389/, PCWG is moving towards a tick-tock meeting arrangements to better accommodate participants along the globe. For even weeks starting this Wed, we will have a new meeting time on UTC0700. For odd weeks we will remain for the UTC1400 time slot. Look forward to meet you all at #openstack-publiccloud on Wed ! -- Zhipeng (Howard) Huang Standard Engineer IT Standard & Patent/IT Product Line Huawei Technologies Co,. Ltd Email: huangzhipeng at huawei.com Office: Huawei Industrial Base, Longgang, Shenzhen (Previous) Research Assistant Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Lab, Calit2 University of California, Irvine Email: zhipengh at uci.edu Office: Calit2 Building Room 2402 OpenStack, OPNFV, OpenDaylight, OpenCompute Aficionado -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amy at demarco.com Tue Jul 24 15:05:51 2018 From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:05:51 -0500 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] UC Election - Looking for Election Officials Message-ID: Hey Stackers, We are getting ready for the Summer UC election and we need to have at least two Election Officials. I was wondering if you would like to help us on that process. You can find all the details of the election at https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2018.html. I do want to point out to those who are new that Election Officials are unable to run in the election itself but can of course vote. The election dates will be: August 6 - August 17, 05:59 UTC: Open candidacy for UC positions August 20 - August 24, 11:59 UTC: UC elections (voting) Please, reach out to any of the current UC members or simple reply to this email if you can help us in this community process. Thanks, OpenStack User Committee Amy, Leong, Matt, Melvin, and Saverio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ed at leafe.com Tue Jul 24 15:16:54 2018 From: ed at leafe.com (Ed Leafe) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:16:54 -0500 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] UC Election - Looking for Election Officials In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <07E68A79-E202-4EFD-9C1A-906CDB7B3481@leafe.com> On Jul 24, 2018, at 10:05 AM, Amy Marrich wrote: > > We are getting ready for the Summer UC election and we need to have at least two Election Officials. I was wondering if you would like to help us on that process. I’d be willing to do it again. -- Ed Leafe From amy at demarco.com Tue Jul 24 16:39:18 2018 From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:39:18 -0500 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] UC Election - Looking for Election Officials In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just wanted to say THANK you as we now have 3 officials! Please participate in the User Committee elections as a candidate and perhaps most importantly by voting! Thanks, Amy (spotz) On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Amy Marrich wrote: > Hey Stackers, > > > We are getting ready for the Summer UC election and we need to have at > least two Election Officials. I was wondering if you would like to help us > on that process. You can find all the details of the election at > https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2018.html. > > > I do want to point out to those who are new that Election Officials are > unable to run in the election itself but can of course vote. > > > > The election dates will be: > > August 6 - August 17, 05:59 UTC: Open candidacy for UC positions > > August 20 - August 24, 11:59 UTC: UC elections (voting) > > > > Please, reach out to any of the current UC members or simple reply to this > email if you can help us in this community process. > > > > Thanks, > > > > OpenStack User Committee > > Amy, Leong, Matt, Melvin, and Saverio > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amy at demarco.com Tue Jul 24 19:24:25 2018 From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:24:25 -0500 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] UC Election - Looking for Election Officials In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And for those curious... our officials are..... Ed Leafe, Chandan Kumar and then Mohamed Elsakhawy Thanks, Amy (spotz) (Who's claiming lack of sleep for not including the names earlier) On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Amy Marrich wrote: > Just wanted to say THANK you as we now have 3 officials! Please > participate in the User Committee elections as a candidate and perhaps most > importantly by voting! > > Thanks, > > Amy (spotz) > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Amy Marrich wrote: > >> Hey Stackers, >> >> >> We are getting ready for the Summer UC election and we need to have at >> least two Election Officials. I was wondering if you would like to help us >> on that process. You can find all the details of the election at >> https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2018.html. >> >> >> I do want to point out to those who are new that Election Officials are >> unable to run in the election itself but can of course vote. >> >> >> >> The election dates will be: >> >> August 6 - August 17, 05:59 UTC: Open candidacy for UC positions >> >> August 20 - August 24, 11:59 UTC: UC elections (voting) >> >> >> >> Please, reach out to any of the current UC members or simple reply to >> this email if you can help us in this community process. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> OpenStack User Committee >> >> Amy, Leong, Matt, Melvin, and Saverio >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stig.openstack at telfer.org Tue Jul 24 19:47:00 2018 From: stig.openstack at telfer.org (Stig Telfer) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 20:47:00 +0100 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [scientific] IRC Meeting: Linaro Ansible+OpenHPC and so on Message-ID: <73389F50-78E4-42EE-9A74-DB0359C85A3C@telfer.org> Hello all - We have a Scientific SIG meeting today at 2100 UTC (just about 2 hours time) in IRC channel #openstack-meeting. Everyone is welcome. This week we’ve got a couple of dates for the calendar, plus details of a new ansible-driven deployment method for OpenHPC. Cheers, Stig From stig.openstack at telfer.org Wed Jul 25 08:22:38 2018 From: stig.openstack at telfer.org (Stig Telfer) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:22:38 +0100 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [scientific] Ansible-driven OpenHPC Message-ID: <9BF8D9DE-B71B-4FB2-A18A-029E33C54E23@telfer.org> Hi All - In the course of yesterday’s meeting there was interest from a range of people in Ansible-driven deployment of OpenHPC (on OpenStack, naturally). Currently there appear to be n implementations for n people. Through the SIG we are trying to gather parties interested in this. Is there anyone here who’d like to take part in trying to shape something in common? Cheers, Stig From chkumar246 at gmail.com Tue Jul 24 15:14:44 2018 From: chkumar246 at gmail.com (Chandan kumar) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 20:44:44 +0530 Subject: [Openstack-sigs] [Openstack] UC Election - Looking for Election Officials In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Amy, On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 8:41 PM Amy Marrich wrote: > > Hey Stackers, > > > We are getting ready for the Summer UC election and we need to have at least two Election Officials. I was wondering if you would like to help us on that process. You can find all the details of the election at https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-aug2018.html. > > > I do want to point out to those who are new that Election Officials are unable to run in the election itself but can of course vote. > > > > The election dates will be: > > August 6 - August 17, 05:59 UTC: Open candidacy for UC positions > > August 20 - August 24, 11:59 UTC: UC elections (voting) > > > > Please, reach out to any of the current UC members or simple reply to this email if you can help us in this community process. > I want to help on this. let me know how can i proceed? Thanks, Chandan Kumar