October 2019 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[release] Release countdown for week R-1, October 7-11
by Sean McGinnis 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Development Focus ----------------- We are on the final mile of this Train ride! (You can thank Thierry for that one ^) Remember that the Train final release will include the latest release candidate (for cycle-with-rc deliverables) or the latest intermediary release (for cycle-with-intermediary deliverables) available. Thursday, October 10th is the deadline for final Train release candidates as well as any last cycle-with-intermediary deliverables. We will then enter a quiet period until we tag the final release on October 16th. Teams should be prioritizing fixing release-critical bugs, before that deadline. Otherwise it's time to start planning the Ussuri development cycle, including discussing Forum and PTG sessions content, in preparation of the Summit in Shanghai next month. Actions --------- Watch for any translation patches coming through on the stable/train branch and merge them quickly. If you discover a release-critical issue, please make sure to fix it on the master branch first, then backport the bugfix to the stable/train branch before triggering a new release. Please drop by #openstack-release with any questions or concerns about the upcoming release! Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Final Train release: October 16 Forum+PTG at Shanghai summit: November 4

1 0

[keystone] Ussuri roadmap
by Colleen Murphy 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hi team, In past cycles we used Trello for tracking our goals throughout a cycle, which gave us flexibility and visibility over the cycle plans as a whole in conjunction with specs and launchpad bugs. Trello is a proprietary platform and in the last few months changed its ToS to limit the number of public boards an organization can have, and the keystone team has reached that limit. Rather than try to backup and archive our old boards or create another team or a non-team board, for Ussuri I would like to try using a board on a different platform, Taiga: https://tree.taiga.io/project/keystone-ussuri-roadmap/kanban Taiga is AGPLv3 and has no restrictions on its hosted version that I've discovered yet. Many thanks to Morgan for discovering and researching it. I've copied over our incomplete stories from the Train roadmap[1] and arranged the kanban board more or less the same way as the old Trello board, but the platform seems to be very flexible and we could change the layout and workflows in any way that makes sense. For instance, while I only enabled the kanban feature, there is also a sprints/backlog mode if we wanted to take advantage of that. I can grant administrator privileges to anyone who is interested in investigating all the configuration options (or you can create your own sandbox projects to play with). The main deficiency seems to be the lack of support for "teams" or "organizations"[2], but users can be added to the board individually. Action required: * If you were a member of the old Trello keystone team and would to be a member of this board, send me an email address that I can send an invite to * Once you have an account and are added to the board, please have a look at the stories that are already there an assign yourself to the ones you are working on or plan to work on, and update their status or add relevant reviews as comments. Feel free to play with the platform's features and provide feedback in this thread or at next week's team meeting. Please also let me know if you have concerns about using this platform. Colleen [1] https://trello.com/b/ClKW9C8x/keystone-train-roadmap [2] https://tree.taiga.io/project/taiga/us/2129

1 0

[requirements][mistral][amqp] Failing “docs” job due to the upper constraint conflict for amqp
by Renat Akhmerov 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hi, We have a failing “docs” ([1]) CI job that fails because it implicitly brings amqp 2.5.2 but this lib is not allowed to be higher than 2.5.1 in the upper-constraings.txt in the requirements project ([2]). We see that there’s the patch [3] generated by the proposal bot that bumps the constraint to 2.5.2 for amqp (among others) but it was given -2. Please assist on how to address in the best way. Should we bump only amqp version in upper constraints for now? [1] https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/6fe7c7d3e60b40458d2a98f3a293f412… [2] https://github.com/openstack/requirements/blob/master/upper-constraints.txt… [3] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/681382 Thanks Renat Akhmerov @Nokia

2 3

Proposed Forum Schedule
by Jimmy McArthur 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hello! I'm attaching a PDF of the proposed Shanghai Forum Schedule. I'll publish the same on the actual website later this afternoon. However, there is still time for feedback/time changes, assuming there aren't conflicts for speakers/moderators. This is also available for download here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qp0I9xnyOK3mhBitQnk2a7VuS9XClvyF/view?usp=… Please respond to this thread with any concerns. Cheers, Jimmy

1 0

[nova][kolla] questions on cells
by Mark Goddard 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hi, I'm currently working (with dougsz) on adding support for nova cells v2 in Kolla Ansible. I have a few questions, and things that I'd like confirming. 1. Is there any benefit to not having a superconductor? Presumably it's a little more efficient in the single cell case? Also IIUC it only requires a single message queue so is a little simpler? 2. Do console proxies need to live in the cells? This is what devstack does in superconductor mode. I did some digging through nova code, and it looks that way. Testing with novncproxy agrees. This suggests we need to expose a unique proxy endpoint for each cell, and configure all computes to use the right one via e.g. novncproxy_base_url, correct? 3. Should I upgrade the superconductor or conductor service first? 4. Does the cell conductor need access to the API DB? 5. What DB configuration should be used in nova.conf when running online data migrations? I can see some migrations that seem to need the API DB, and others that need a cell DB. If I just give it the API DB, will it use the cell mappings to get to each cell DB, or do I need to run it once for each cell? 6. After an upgrade, when can we restart services to unpin the compute RPC version? Looking at the compute RPC API, it looks like the super conductor will remain pinned until all computes have been upgraded. For a cell conductor, it looks like I could restart it to unpin after upgrading all computes in that cell, correct? 7. Which services require policy.{yml,json}? I can see policy referenced in API, conductor and compute. I'm trying to design it such that it's possible to deploy a new cell in an existing environment, and upgrade one cell at a time. Getting the ordering right for this is fiddly, and I expect I'll be back to get some eyes on my plan. Cheers, Mark

6 16

[all] Planned Ussuri release schedule published
by Sean McGinnis 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hey everyone, The proposed release schedule for Ussuri was up for a few weeks with only cosmetic issues to address. The proposed schedule has now been merged and published to: https://releases.openstack.org/ussuri/schedule.html Barring any new issues with the schedule being raised, this should be our schedule for the Ussuri development cycle. The planned Ussuri release date is May 13, 2020. Thanks! Sean

6 11

[i18n] Request to be added as Vietnamese translation group coordinators
by Trinh Nguyen 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hi i18n team, Dai and I would like to volunteer as the coordinators of the Vietnamese translation group. If you find us qualified, please let us know. Bests, -- *Trinh Nguyen* *www.edlab.xyz <https://www.edlab.xyz>*

5 7

[all] [tc] [docs] [release] [ptls] Docs as SIG: Ownership of docs.openstack.org
by Alexandra Settle 03 Oct '19

03 Oct '19

Hi all, Quick recap: The documentation team is set to disband as an official project, and make the leap to becoming a SIG (Special Interest Group). This decision is not one we have made lightly, but with the changes of direction since Pike (project documentation belonging with the projects, etc) the need for a centralised documentation team as an official project is no longer integral to producing the software. The transition of the docs team to a SIG has already begun [1] and [2]. The openstackdocstheme, openstack-doc-tools, os-api-ref and whereto have been placed within the remit of the Oslo team and approved. The remaining individuals working on the docs team are sorting through what's left and where it is best placed. In [1], Doug has rightfully pointed out that whilst the documentation team as it stands today is no longer "integral", the docs.openstack.org web site is. An owner is required. The suggestion is for the Release Management team is the "least worst" (thanks, tonyb) place for the website manaagement to land. As Tony points out, this requires learning new tools and processes but the individuals working on the docs team currently have no intention to leave, and are around to help manage this from the SIG. Open to discussion and suggestions, but to summarise the proposal here: docs.openstack.org ownership is to transition to be the responsibility of the Release Management team officially provided there are no strong objections. Thanks, Alex IRC: asettle [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657142/ [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/657141/

5 11

[kolla-ansible] migration
by Ignazio Cassano 02 Oct '19

02 Oct '19

Hello, Anyone have tried to migrate an existing openstack installation to kolla containers? Thanks Ignazio

5 16

[openstack-ansible] Stepping down as core reviewer
by Jesse Pretorius 02 Oct '19

02 Oct '19

Hi everyone, While I had hoped to manage keeping up with OSA reviews and some contributions, unfortunately there is too much on my plate in my new role to allow me to give OSA sufficient time and I feel that it's important to not give any false promises. I am therefore stepping down as a core reviewer for OSA. My journey with OpenStack-Ansible started with initial contributions before it was an official OpenStack project, went on to helping lead the project to becoming an official project in the big tent, then on to becoming a successful project with diverse contributors of which I was proud to be a part. Over time I learned a heck of a lot about building and leading an Open Source community, about developing Ansible playbooks and roles at significant scale, and about building, packaging and deploying python software. It has been a very valuable experience through which I have grown personally and professionally. This community's strengths are in its leadership by operators, its readiness to assist newcomers and in striving to maintain a deployment system which is easy to understand and use (while somehow also being ridiculously flexible). As Jean-Philippe Evrard has recently expressed, this is the DNA which makes the community special. As you should all be aware, I am always ready to help when asked and I can also share historical context if there is a need for that so please feel free to ping me on IRC or add me to a review and I'll do my best. My journey onward is working with TripleO in the upgrades team, so you'll still find me contributing to OpenStack as a whole. I'll be hanging out in #tripleo and #openstack-dev on IRC if you're looking for me. All the best, Jesse (odyssey4me)

2 1