September 2020 - openstack-discuss

[tripleo][validations] new Validation Framework demos
by Mathieu Bultel 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

Hey TripleO, I have recorded three demos with the new Validation Framework (VF): 1st demo is similar to what Gael did few months ago but with the new code refactored (validations-libs/validations-common projects): https://asciinema.org/a/NRLULghjJa87qxRD9Nfq0FYoa 2nd demo is a use of the VF without any openstack/TripleO prerequisite, on a fresh and empty Ubuntu docker container, with only validations-libs and validations-common projects. It shows that only with a apt-get install git and python3-pip and with a basic python project installation we can run validations and use the framework: https://asciinema.org/a/2Jp9LZbN0xhJAR09zIpI6OpuB So it can answer a few demands such as: How to run validations as prep undercloud installation ? How to run validations on a non-openstack project ? What are the bare minimum requirements for being able to run Validations on a system ? May I run Validation remotely from my machine ? etc... The third one is mainly related to the deployment itself of TripleO. By using a simple PoC (https://review.opendev.org/#/c/724289/), I was able to make TripleO consuming the validations-libs framework and validation logging callback plugin. So it shows in this demo how the deploy steps playbook can be logged, parsed and shown with the VF CLI. This can be improve, modify & so on of course... it's basic usage. https://asciinema.org/a/344484 https://asciinema.org/a/344509 Mathieu.

4 5

[all] Switch to python3-pycryptodome
by Thomas Goirand 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

Hi, A number of bug reports have been filled against the Debian OpenStack packages in Sid: - keystone - python-openstackclient - python-manilaclient - python-ironic-lib - python-oauth2client - python-pysaml2 The content of the bugs is: > Source: python-pysaml2 > Version: 4.5.0-8 > Severity: important > Tags: sid bullseye > Usertags: pycrypto > > Dear maintainer, > > python-pysaml2 currently Build-Depends or Depends on python3-crypto > from PyCrypto. This project is no longer maintained and PyCryptodome > (https://www.pycryptodome.org/en/latest/) provides a drop in > replacement. Please switch to python3-pycryptodome. I'd like to > remove python-crypto before the release of bullseye. > > Cheers So my question is: - Is it really a drop-in replacement, and can it be replaced in the packages (maybe, delta the imports?)? - If not, how much work is this? - Can the OpenStack project also move to pycryptodome? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

2 1

[horizon][dev] Horizon.next
by Apsey, Christopher 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

Horizon team, I recently picked up a few talented dev interns, and one of them is very interested in webdev and quite skilled. He will have up to 25 hours/week to devote to development tasks of my choosing over the 8 months or so, and I'd like to offer him up as someone who can spend all of his time working with the horizon team on horizon.next (npm-based). We rely on horizon heavily internally, and a better experience for the end-user is pretty high on our list (particularly performance-wise). He has no experience developing in the OpenStack ecosystem, but is otherwise ready to 'get to work' after process/code familiarization. Can anyone on the horizon team offer up some cycles to help get him spun up/integrated? Or is the best bet just pointing him at the IRC channel? Thanks Chris Apsey GEORGIA CYBER CENTER

3 2

Re: [tripleo]] tripleo victoria rc1
by Marios Andreou 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:16 AM Yatin Karel <ykarel(a)redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Marios, > > << we don't normally/aren't expected to cut release candidates. > However after discussion with and guidance from Wes I decided to > propose an rc1 as practice since I << haven't used the new releases > tool before [4]. > << The proposal is up at [1] but I've set -1 there on request from > reviewers; we can't merge that until [2] merges first. > > Is this just about releasing RC Tags or changing the release-model > that tripleo used to follow:- cycle-with-intermediary(cycle-trailing > earlier) vs cycle-with-rc. Maybe you can share more context with the > this is just about bumping the git tags on the projects and not about changing the release model. > discussion points as to what's different this time and reasoning for > the same to have a clear picture. > nothing different wrt the release model - see the diff it is just bumping the hash and version https://review.opendev.org/gitweb?p=openstack%2Freleases.git;a=commitdiff;h… . We are just making a release to coincide with the wider openstack Victoria RC1 even though we aren't expected to follow the rc model with our 'cycle with intermediary' on these projects. > And if possible can you also share what's the plan for GA release for > TripleO like how it will be this time. > So weshay is still PTL, and we haven't discussed this in any great detail, except that we may have to delay a little bit cutting branch and releasing victoria final. Generally with rc tags stable branch is also cut but i don't see that > in https://review.opendev.org/#/c/754346/. And i hope this will not be > right I guess the confusion is that this isn't a proper RC since we don't have those 'officially' .It is just a version bump that coincides with the victoria rc1 milestone end of last week. hope it helps, also, did you forget to reply-all? should i send to the list (just confirmed with ykarel and re-adding list to addresses) thanks, marios > merged until victoria tripleo jobs are ready if cutting > stable/victoria branch. > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 10:05 PM Marios Andreou <marios(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > > > hello TripleO folks o/ > > > > we don't normally/aren't expected to cut release candidates. However > after discussion with and guidance from Wes I decided to propose an rc1 as > practice since I haven't used the new releases tool before [4]. > > > > The proposal is up at [1] but I've set -1 there on request from > reviewers; we can't merge that until [2] merges first. > > > > If you are interested please check [1] and add any comments. In > particular let me know if you want to include a release for one of the > independent repos [3] (though for validations-common/libs we need to reach > out to the validations team they are managing those AFAIK). > > > > thanks, hope you enjoy your weekend! > > > > [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/754346/ > > [2] https://review.opendev.org/754347 > > [3] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#independent > > [4] > https://releases.openstack.org/reference/using.html#using-new-release-comma… > > Thanks and Regards > Yatin Karel > >

2 2

Re: [all][elections][ptl][tc] Combined PTL/TC Nominations ending in less than 24 hours
by Jeremy Stanley 29 Sep '20

29 Sep '20

Another reminder that we are in the last hours for declaring PTL and TC candidacies. Nominations are open until Sep 29, 2020 23:45 UTC. If you want to stand for election, don't delay, follow the instructions at [1] to make sure the community knows your intentions. Make sure your nomination has been submitted to the openstack/election repository and approved by election officials. Election statistics[2]: Nominations started @ 2020-09-22 23:45:00 UTC Nominations end @ 2020-09-29 23:45:00 UTC Nominations duration : 7 days, 0:00:00 Nominations remaining : 23:38:26 Nominations progress : 85.93% --------------------------------------------------- Projects[1] : 55 Projects with candidates : 25 ( 45.45%) Projects with election : 0 ( 0.00%) --------------------------------------------------- Need election : 0 () Need appointment : 30 (Barbican* Blazar* Cinder* Cloudkitty Cyborg Designate* Ec2_Api Freezer Horizon Ironic* Karbor Magnum* Manila Masakari Monasca Murano Octavia OpenStack_Charms Oslo Packaging_Rpm Placement Qinling Quality_Assurance* Requirements* Searchlight Senlin Solum Storlets* Telemetry Watcher) =================================================== Stats gathered @ 2020-09-29 00:06:34 UTC (* indicates teams with pending nominations which haven't been confirmed by more than one election official yet) This means that with approximately 2 days left, 30 projects will be deemed leaderless. In this case the TC will oversee PTL selection as described by [3]. There are also currently 2 confirmed candidates and 3 additional pending nominations for the 4 open Technical Committee seats, indicating it's likely there will be a runoff poll for the TC election. Thank you, [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/#how-to-submit-a-candidacy [2] Any open reviews at https://review.openstack.org/#/q/is:open+project:openstack/election have not been factored into these stats. [3] https://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20141128-elections-process-for… -- Jeremy Stanley on behalf of the OpenStack Technical Election Officials

1 0

[election][storlets] PTL candidacy for Wallaby
by Takashi Kajinami 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

Hi All, I'd like to announce my candidacy to run PTL role for Storlets project in the next Wallaby cycles, to continue PTL role from the previous Victoria cycle. In this cycle, I'll focus on the existing proposals to improve stability and operability of Storlets. Since we have discussion slots in coming PTG, I'll moderate the discussion there and will try to make these proposals land during this cycle. Thank you for your consideration ! Thank you, Takashi Kajinami

1 0

[election][qa] PTL candidacy for Wallaby
by Masayuki Igawa 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

Hi everyone, I want to propose my candidacy and continue serving as Quality Assurance PTL for the Wallaby cycle. First off, I would like to thank you all the contributors, core reviewers, and anyone involved and makes the OpenStack better. In Victoria cycle, we've added a job for generating doc from docstrings and added many docstrings for that already. We can see the outcomes here[2]. And we've also made a workflow[3][4] to get along with the upper-constraints in tox.ini. We still have some more planned work pending for Victoria, such as making tempest scenario manager a stable interface, improving tempest cleanup, etc. I think we will accomplish them in Victoria or Wallaby cycle. Along with daily QA activities, my priorities for QA for the next cycle will be: * Guiding and motivating more contributors to QA projects, improving documentation and advertising OpenStack QA projects. * Stability of Tempest scenario manager. * Completing Victoria priority items if it's still remaining. It's hard to accomplish without our collaboration. So, let's do it together! [1] http://stackalytics.com/?user_id=igawa [2] https://docs.openstack.org/tempest/latest/tests/modules.html [3] https://docs.openstack.org/tempest/latest/requirement_upper_constraint_for_… [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/QA/releases#Project_with_release_mode:_cycl… Thanks for your consideration! -- Masayuki Igawa (masayukig)

1 0

Swift Installation Error
by WALSH CHANG 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

To whom it may concern, I am very new to OpenStack. I had an error when I install the Swift service. Error trying to load config from /etc/swift/proxy-server.conf: Entry point 'proxy\naccount_autocreate = True' not found in egg 'swift' (dir: /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages; protocols: paste.app_factory, paste.composite_factory, paste.composit_factory; entry_points: ) Just wondering if it's ok to have storage node and controller node on the same device. I use the controller node as the storage node, and use the flash drive as the storage space. Not sure if this is the reason for the error. It will be very appreciated if someone can provide some suggestions. Kind regards, Walsh

2 1

[election][cinder] PTL candidacy for Wallaby
by Brian Rosmaita 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

Hello everyone, I hereby announce my candidacy for Cinder PTL for the Wallaby cycle. I've been PTL for two cycles, so you have a pretty good idea by now of what it's like to work on the Cinder project with me in that role, and whether or not it would be a good idea for me to continue. There are a few things I'd like to see the project emphasize during the Wallaby development cycle; hopefully the team will self-organize around these themes. * Continued development of the cinder-tempest-plugin. We need more automated tests for more complicated scenarios, partly to prevent regressions for fixed bugs, but also to detect some problems before they are reported by users. * Better understanding of why some of the gate jobs are intermittently failing, particularly the backup-related tests in the tempest-storage suite. * Better review bandwidth. The core team we carried over from Ussuri to Victoria is still active, but as their careers have progressed, they have taken on more responsibilities in their day jobs, and their review counts have declined a bit. We added Lucio as a new core during Victoria; it would be good to add another person or two during the Wallaby cycle. Anyone working on the cinder project who's interested in working to get themselves into a position where they could be nominated as a cinder core, please contact me (or any of the current cores) to discuss what the expectations are. Those are what's been on my mind lately. As far as specific features, etc., those will emerge from our PTG discussions, to which I encourage you to contribute: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/wallaby-ptg-cinder-planning We've had productive virtual mid-cycle meetings for two cycles now, and the cinder-weekly-meeting-once-a-month-in-videoconference seems to help keep the team connected, so I'd like to continue that. The team adapted well to the virtual PTG format for Victoria, so I'm confident we'll have a productive virtual Wallaby PTG, though I sincerely hope we'll once again have the opportunity to meet face-to-face for the 'X' PTG. As far as external interest in the Cinder project goes, we've added some new drivers in Victoria and already have one new driver proposed for Wallaby, with at least one more on the way, which is nice. Thanks for reading this far, and thank you for your consideration. Brian Rosmaita (rosmaita)

1 0

[all][election][tc] Candidacy
by Jay Bryant 28 Sep '20

28 Sep '20

Dear OpenStack Community, This note is to officially announce my intention to be re-elected to the OpenStack TC in the Wallaby cycle. At this point, I think that many of you know me, but for those who don't I will briefly introduce myself. I have been a part of the OpenStack Community since early in 2013. At that time I was working for IBM and acted as the liaison between the storage teams developing Cinder drivers for IBM's storage solutions and the Community. I am currently working at Lenovo as the Principal Cloud Architect, leading a team that is developing automated infrastructure deployment and cloud deploy solutions for several different cloud platforms. During my time in the OpenStack Community I have been a Cinder core team member and served as PTL for Cinder for two years. I have been an active part of on-boarding for new Community members, helping and supporting the Upstream Institute sessions since the 2016 session in Barcelona. I also have been active in projects outside of Cinder, acting as Oslo liaison for Cinder and helping the documentation team back in the days that that was a thing. Most recently, I have served a year on the OpenStack TC. I will admit that the experience has come with a learning curve. My time has also been during a time of change for the TC and for OpenStack in general. During my time on the TC I was proud to organize the first review of Technical Committee questions in the annual user survey. The exercise was interesting and I feel it brought good information to the TC with regards to what the community needs to be doing to best serve our users. I also have been active in the discussions around how to handle leaderless projects. I feel that my experience as a PTL for a notable period of time and core team member for over 6 years gives me perspective to talk about how we continue to develop OpenStack project structure. During my last year, my focus at work has changed from pure development to being more of a designer/consumer of cloud solutions. The solutions are not exclusively OpenStack, but now include OpenShift and VMware based clouds. The change in focus has given me new perspective on how OpenStack fits into the cloud ecosystem and I think it is perspective that will be helpful in the coming year as we now have a combined Technical Committee and User Committee. If re-elected I will support getting the OpenStack community connected with other cloud communities, especially the k8s community. I will continue to support efforts to adapt OpenStack's processes and projects to make things easier for projects both large and small. I also hope to help to set goals for the community that will help it continue to be a vibrant and relevant cloud solution for years to come! Working with the OpenStack Community has always been something that I have been very proud to do in my career. I thank you all for the opportunity to serve as a TC member the last year and hope that I can continue to serve the community in this capacity. Sincerely, Jay Bryant IRC (Freenode): jungleboyj

1 0