September 2019 - openstack-discuss

How to boot 2 VMs in openstack on same subnet?
by Paul Belanger 12 Sep '19

12 Sep '19

Greetings, We use a few openstack public clouds for testing in the ansible project, specifically using nodepool. We have a use case, where we need to boot 2 VMs on the same public subnet for testing reasons. However, the majority of the clouds we are using, do not have a single subnet for their entire public IP range. Up until now, we boot the 2 VMs, then hope they land on the same subnet, but this isn't really efficient. Basically looking to see if there is a better way to handle this either via openstacksdk or some other configuration we need cloud side. Also note, we'd like to do this with public provider network (which we don't have control over) and avoid using private network for now. Paul

3 3

Re: [rpm-packaging] Proposing new core member
by Nicolas Bock 12 Sep '19

12 Sep '19

On 9/11/19 6:48 AM, Thomas Bechtold wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to nominate Ralf Haferkamp for rpm-packaging core. > Ralf has be active in doing very valuable reviews since some time so I > feel he would be a great addition to the team. > > Please give your +1/-1 in the next days. +1 > Cheers, > > Tom > >

1 0

[rpm-packaging] Proposing new core member
by Thomas Bechtold 12 Sep '19

12 Sep '19

Hi, I would like to nominate Ralf Haferkamp for rpm-packaging core. Ralf has be active in doing very valuable reviews since some time so I feel he would be a great addition to the team. Please give your +1/-1 in the next days. Cheers, Tom

2 1

[sahara] Cancelling Sahara meeting September 12
by Jeremy Freudberg 12 Sep '19

12 Sep '19

Hi all, There will be no Sahara meeting 2019-09-12, the reason being that Luigi is not around and there is not much to discuss anyway. Holler if you need anything. Thanks, Jeremy

1 0

Re: [Horizon] Paging and Angular...
by Marek Lyčka 12 Sep '19

12 Sep '19

Hi, > we need people familiar with Angular and Horizon's ways of using Angular (which seem to be very > non-standard) that would be willing to write and review code. Unfortunately the people who originally > introduced Angular in Horizon and designed how it is used are no longer interested in contributing, > and there don't seem to be any new people able to handle this. I've been working with Horizon's Angular for quite some time and don't mind keeping at it, but it's useless unless I can get my code merged, hence my original message. As far as attracting new developers goes, I think that removing some barriers to entry couldn't hurt - seeing commits simply lost to time being one of them. I can see it as being fairly demoralizing. > Personally, I think that a better long-time strategy would be to remove all > Angular-based views from Horizon, and focus on maintaining one language and one set of tools. Removing AngularJS wouldn't remove JavaScript from horizon. We'd still be left with a home-brewish framework (which is buggy as is). I don't think removing js completely is realistic either: we'd lose functionality and worsen user experience. I think that keeping Angular is the better alternative: 1) A lot of work has already been put into Angularization, solving many problems 2) Unlike legacy js, Angular code is covered by automated tests 3) Arguably, improvments are, on average, easier to add to Angular than pure js implementations Whatever reservations there may be about the current implementation can be identified and addressed, but all in all, I think removing it at this point would be counterproductive. M. čt 5. 9. 2019 v 14:28 odesílatel Radomir Dopieralski <openstack(a)sheep.art.pl> napsal: > Both of your questions have one answer: we need people familiar with > Angular and Horizon's ways of using Angular (which seem to be very > non-standard) that would be willing to write and review code. Unfortunately > the people who originally introduced Angular in Horizon and designed how it > is used are no longer interested in contributing, and there don't seem to > be any new people able to handle this. Personally, I think that a better > long-time strategy would be to remove all Angular-based views from Horizon, > and focus on maintaining one language and one set of tools. > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 1:52 PM Marek Lyčka <marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I took apart the Horizon paging mechanism while working on [1] and have a >> few of findings: >> >> - Paging is unimplemented/turned off for many (if not most) panels, not >> just Routers and Networks >> - Currently, single page data loads could potentially bump up against API >> hard limits >> - Sorting is also broken in places where paging is enabled (Old >> images...), see [2] >> - The Networks table loads data via three API calls due to neutron API >> limitations, which makes the marker based mechanism unusable >> - There is at least one more minor bug which breaks pagination, there may >> be more >> >> While some of these things may be fixable in different hacky and/or >> inefficient ways, >> we already have Angular implementations which fix many of them and make >> improving >> and fixing the rest easier. >> >> Since Angular ports would help with other unrelated issues as well and >> allow us to >> start deprecating old code, I was wondering two things: >> >> 1) What would it take to increase the priority of Angularization in >> general? >> 2) Can the Code Review process be modified/improved to increase the >> chance for >> Angularization changes to be code reviewed and merged if they do >> happen? >> My previous attempts in this area have failed because of lack of code >> reviewers... >> >> Since full Angularization is still the goal for Horizon as far as I know, >> I'd rather >> spend time doing that than hacking solutions to different problems in >> legacy code >> which is slated deprecation. >> >> Best Regards, >> Marek >> >> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1746184 >> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1782732 >> >> -- >> Marek Lyčka >> Linux Developer >> >> Ultimum Technologies s.r.o. >> Na Poříčí 1047/26, 11000 Praha 1 >> Czech Republic >> >> marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io <stanislav.ulrych(a)ultimum.io> >> *https://ultimum.io <https://ultimum.io/>* >> > -- Marek Lyčka Linux Developer Ultimum Technologies s.r.o. Na Poříčí 1047/26, 11000 Praha 1 Czech Republic marek.lycka(a)ultimum.io <stanislav.ulrych(a)ultimum.io> *https://ultimum.io <https://ultimum.io/>*

3 3

RE: [winstackers][powervmstackers][tc] removing winstackers and PowerVMStackers from TC governance
by Lucian Petrut 11 Sep '19

11 Sep '19

Hi, I had a chat with my team and we think it would be best if we could keep Winstackers as a separate team. This is mostly because of the associated projects, which are essential for the Windows – Openstack integration effort. Other teams may not be interested in adopting those projects, which would be required if we chose the SIG route. Despite missing this election, I can assure you that we’re quite active in this endeavor. I’m willing to take the PTL role, offloading this task from Claudiu, whose time was quite limited recently. Regards, Lucian Petrut Cloudbase Solutions ________________________________________ From: Mohammed Naser [mnaser(a)vexxhost.com] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2019 3:05 PM To: Thierry Carrez Cc: OpenStack Discuss Subject: Re: [winstackers][powervmstackers][tc] removing winstackers and PowerVMStackers from TC governance On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:10 AM Thierry Carrez <thierry(a)openstack.org> wrote: > > Divya K Konoor wrote: > > Missing the deadline for a PTL nomination cannot be the reason for > > removing governance. > > I agree with that, but missing the deadline twice in a row is certainly > a sign of some disconnect with the rest of the OpenStack community. > Project teams require a minimal amount of reactivity and presence, so it > is fair to question whether PowerVMStackers should continue as a project > team in the future. > > > PowerVMStackers continue to be an active project > > and would want to be continued to be governed under OpenStack. For PTL, > > an eligible candidate can still be appointed . > > There is another option, to stay under OpenStack governance but without > the constraints of a full project team: PowerVMStackers could be made an > OpenStack SIG. > > I already proposed that 6 months ago (last time there was no PTL nominee > for the team), on the grounds that interest in PowerVM was clearly a > special interest, and a SIG might be a better way to regroup people > interested in supporting PowerVM in OpenStack. > > The objection back then was that PowerVMStackers maintained a number of > PowerVM-related code, plugins and drivers that should ideally be adopted > by their consuming project teams (nova, neutron, ceilometer), and that > making it a SIG would endanger that adoption process. > > I still think it makes sense to consider PowerVMStackers as a Special > Interest Group. As long as the PowerVM-related code is not adopted by > the consuming projects, it is arguably a special interest, and not a > completely-integrated part of OpenStack components. > > The only difference in being a SIG (compared to being a project team) > would be to reduce the amount of mandatory tasks (like designating a PTL > every 6 months). You would still be able to own repositories, get room > at OpenStack events, vote on TC election... > > It would seem to be the best solution in your case. I echo all of this and I think at this point, it's better for the deliverables to be within a SIG. > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. http://vexxhost.com

1 0

[sigs][publiccloud][publiccloud-wg][publiccloud-sig] Bi-weekly meeting for the Public Cloud SIG tomorrow
by Tobias Rydberg 11 Sep '19

11 Sep '19

Hi all, It is time for a new meeting for the Public Cloud SIG! Would love to see as many of you there as possible! Topics for the meeting includes Shanghai Forum topics and moving forward on the billing initiative. Time and place: Tomorrow, 12th September at 1400 UTC in #openstack-publiccloud! Agenda can be found at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/publiccloud-sig Feel free to add topics to the agenda! Cheers, Tobias -- Tobias Rydberg Senior Developer Twitter & IRC: tobberydberg www.citynetwork.eu | www.citycloud.com INNOVATION THROUGH OPEN IT INFRASTRUCTURE ISO 9001, 14001, 27001, 27015 & 27018 CERTIFIED

1 0

[masakari]
by Liam Young 11 Sep '19

11 Sep '19

Hi, I have a patch up for masakari and another for masakari-monitors: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/647756/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/675734/ If any of the masakari devs have cycles I'd really love to get them landed. Thanks Liam

1 0

[scientific-sig] No IRC meeting today
by Stig Telfer 11 Sep '19

11 Sep '19

Hi all - Apologies, there will not be a Scientific SIG IRC meeting today, due to chair availability. Cheers, Stig

1 0

[all] [tc] [ptls] PDF Goal Update
by Alexandra Settle 11 Sep '19

11 Sep '19

Hi all, According to the Train schedule, this week is the week of "Train Community Goals completed" [1]. In the last few weeks, we've been working hard on the goal to enable PDF support in the project docs. We have successfully completed... 1. Creating a workable solution [2] 2. Communicating this solution via ML [3] As far as the success of the goal is, that has to be measured by the individual teams. But it looks like we're all going really well at implementing the new changes [4]. Thanks to everyone who has jumped in from across the board to make this a success! I wanted to touch base with the teams and gather a status update from the PTLs or project liaisons on where they are at, what questions they may have, and how we (the docs team and TC) can help. Over the next week I will reach out to each team and gather a status update of sorts. Thanks, Alex -- Alexandra Settle <a.settle(a)outlook.com> IRC: asettle [1] https://releases.openstack.org/train/schedule.html#t-goals-complete [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/train-pdf-support-goal [3] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-August/ 008503.html (amongst others) [4] https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:build-pdf-docs

1 0