- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

Re: [Release-job-failures] release-post job for openstack/releases failed
by Thierry Carrez 16 Mar '19

16 Mar '19

zuul(a)openstack.org wrote: > Build failed. > > - tag-releases http://logs.openstack.org/5c/5ce46e390be04b19145d1f316e8283c09abb628d/relea… : POST_FAILURE in 3m 15s > - publish-tox-docs-static publish-tox-docs-static : SKIPPED Issue: ------ All release post-jobs today had a failure in the cleanup phase while cleaning up the signing keys. The 'shred -u ~/.gnupg/*' command fails with: shred: /home/zuul/.gnupg/private-keys-v1.d: failed to open for writing: Is a directory It is likely due to the switch to use bionic hosts for trusted release jobs. Impact: ------- The tagging happens before that failure, so the release itself is not impacted. It does prevent the documentation post-job from running though, so releases.openstack.org is currently out of date. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

2 2

[requirements][ffe][os-brick] Need an exception for os-brick please ...
by Jay Bryant 16 Mar '19

16 Mar '19

Requirements team, We, unfortunately, found some more last minute issues with os-brick. It required yet another release. We are currently working to determine if the version should be 2.8.1. The patch requesting that is here: [1] We also need to ensure that 2.8.0 is not used by anyone. Eric has a patch for that here: [2] Sorry for the trouble late in the game here. Thanks for your help! Jay [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/643588 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/643065

2 1

[neutron] Cancelling drivers meeting
by Miguel Lavalle 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Hi Neutrinos I will be in an airplane at the time of the meeting this week. So let's skip it and we will resume normally on the 22nd Best regards Miguel

1 0

[nova][stable] Thoughts about backporting fix for bug 1378904?
by Matt Riedemann 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Andrey fixed a bug [1] that we've talked about fixing forever which is to disallow AZ renames while the AZ has instances in it. This is a change in API behavior but it's really a "don't let admins shoot themselves in the foot" kind of thing. As such, it didn't have a microversion because users should not have to opt out of broken behavior, but I'm a bit hesitant about backporting the fix [2]. It has a release note so there would be some warning, but what do others think about backporting this? [1] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1378904 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/641351/ -- Thanks, Matt

3 2

[nova][ptl][election] Start the battle
by Jens Harbott 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

We are having two excellent PTL candidates now, making it very difficult for me - and probably others - to decide between them. So I would like to ask the candidates for some statements explaining why they would be the better PTL, lest the election ends up in a tie.

5 4

[nova][dev] Train community goals seeking review/feedback
by melanie witt 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Hi all, As mentioned in the nova meeting today, the TC has two community goals proposed for the Train cycle, available for review and feedback from developers. Please take a look and add your comments to the reviews, if you're interested in helping decide our community goals for Train. * Project Deletion: https://review.openstack.org/639010 * Move legacy client CLIs to OSC: https://review.openstack.org/639376 Cheers, -melanie

1 0

Re: [Release-job-failures] Release of openstack/tripleo-ui failed
by Thierry Carrez 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

zuul(a)openstack.org wrote: > Build failed. > > - release-openstack-javascript http://logs.openstack.org/b5/b5dbb90fb347db2876f61cae8c2623f9ce767dfe/relea… : POST_FAILURE in 6m 25s > - announce-release announce-release : SKIPPED Issue: ------ The release jobs for openstack/tripleo-ui failed while processing the recently-added 10.3.0 tag. The upload-npm task failed with: The task includes an option with an undefined variable. The error was: "hostvars['ubuntu-xenial']" is undefined The error appears to have been in '/var/lib/zuul/builds/83dee2d5710f427583d21e5f49a4c186/trusted/project_1/git.openstack.org/openstack-infra/zuul-jobs/roles/upload-npm/tasks/main.yaml': line 15, column 3, but may be elsewhere in the file depending on the exact syntax problem. The offending line appears to be: - name: Upload tarball to npm ^ here This is likely due to the transition to ubuntu-bionic servers. Impact: ------- The 10.3.0 tarball was never copied to tarballs.openstack.org, and it was not uploaded to NPM either. Once the issue is resolved we should probably re-enqueue that reference to re-trigger the job. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

2 3

[baremetal-sig][ironic] Bare metal logo program
by Chris Hoge 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Hi, We're looking at launching a new bare metal logo program, and we'd like some feedback from the baremetal-sig on how it's implemented and if there's interest in participating in it. This is an early draft of the proposal for community community feedback, and isn't our final plan. This program has several goals. Raising awareness of Ironic as it's being used in production is one of them. This will highlight how Ironic is being used and also serve as a introduction to organizations that are considering tools to manage their bare metal infrastructure. This will also help to help to change the mind-set from OpenStack being a virtualization-focused platform to being a general infrastructure management platform. Ironic is an excellent example of OpenStack software being applicable across a variety of different use cases, like container infrastructure, high-performance computing, and network functions. At a high level anyone in the community who is using Ironic for managing bare-metal services would qualify for it. This would cover a variety of cases, including but not limited to: * Distributions that ship Ironic. * Deployment tools and private clouds that use Ironic to manage servers. * Public clouds that resell bare-metal clouds. * Any private cloud that is using Ironic to manage their bare metal infrastructure, whether end-user facing or not. * Really, any production use of Ironic in any form. As part of the program we will have a bare-metal landing page that links out to the white paper, other documents related to Ironic, participants in the logo program, and links to case studies provided by the participants. The Foundation will also promote how participants in the program are using Ironic through their provided case studies through our various channels. Any vendor who has a marketplace listing will have the bare metal logo applied to that listing. Our major two requirements for participation are that: * You're actually using Ironic or providing software or services based on Ironic. * You provide a relatively short (500-1000 word) use case describing a real-world application (we'd prefer that it not just be a marketing brochure, but something that really highlights how Ironic is being used in production). We would also like for this content to be built into the white paper, as we've seen a demand for case studies in previous publications. If we go forward with the program we plan to launch at the upcoming Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver and highlight the early participants in the program. As the year goes on we'll continue to promote Ironic usage and will always welcome new participants. There are two ways that you can help out right now. The first is just in giving us feedback on this proposal. The second is for you to contact me directly if you would like to be one of the founding participants in the program. Thanks in advance to everyone for your feedback and participation! -Chris

1 1

Re: [Release-job-failures] Release of openstack/governance failed
by Thierry Carrez 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

zuul(a)openstack.org wrote: > Build failed. > > - release-openstack-python http://logs.openstack.org/21/21a5154f6a4d1c317d7b2fe084ecd919ed8cb93e/relea… : POST_FAILURE in 3m 54s > - announce-release announce-release : SKIPPED > - propose-update-constraints propose-update-constraints : SKIPPED Issue: ------ The release jobs for openstack/governance failed while processing the recently-added 0.4.0 tag. During collection of the built artifacts, the following command: /usr/bin/rsync --delay-updates -F --compress --archive --rsh=/usr/bin/ssh -S none -o Port=22 --out-format=<<CHANGED>>%i %n%L zuul@104.130.6.123:/home/zuul/zuul-output/artifacts/ /var/lib/zuul/builds/16d67fd9d85342bfabfd82292183e76c/work/artifacts/ failed host key verification: ED25519 host key for 104.130.6.123 has changed and you have requested strict checking. Impact: ------- The 0.4.0 tarball was never copied to tarballs.openstack.org, and it was not uploaded to Pypi either. Once the issue is resolved we should either re-enqueue that reference to re-trigger the job, or push a 0.4.1. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

2 2

[requirements][FFE][ironic] Stein release freeze exception for Sushy
by Dmitry Tantsur 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Hi all, It came to our attention that rsd-lib is pinning sushy to 1.7.0 [1] because of the issue in the latest 1.8.0 release. This is causing troubles for packagers [2]. I'm proposing releasing 1.8.1 [3] to unblock them. Thanks, Dmitry [1] https://github.com/openstack/rsd-lib/commit/e3a061f4d2bf70e3a2f9411f810d328… [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-rsdclient/+bug/1820032 [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/643258/

2 3