- openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

[LOCI] Failed to build Trove image
by Lingxian Kong 30 Mar '20

30 Mar '20

The command I am using: docker build . \ --build-arg FROM=loci-base:ubuntu \ --build-arg PYTHON3=yes \ --build-arg PROJECT=trove \ --tag loci-trove:ubuntu The error: http://paste.openstack.org/show/791311/ Then I changed pydep.txt: uwsgi [!trove] and ran again, another error occured: http://paste.openstack.org/show/791313/ However, if removed '--build-arg PYTHON3=yes' in the command (even without modifying pydep.txt), the image could be built sucessfully. Does LOCI support to build Python 3 image or I did something wrong? - Best regards, Lingxian Kong Catalyst Cloud

1 0

[tripleo][nova] New project to support advanced Nova features in TripleO
by Piotr Kopec 30 Mar '20

30 Mar '20

Hello, I'd like to introduce a new project and repository [0] that is intended to host Ansible roles to support advanced Nova features, such as FPGA or NVDIMM. Roles will be as generic as possible but the main use case is to use them with TripleO. This project is intendent to be managed similarly to `tripleo-ipa` [1]. Please, accept the change to add new project and repo. Best regards, Piotr [0]: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/715734/ [1]: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711114/

1 0

[all][tc] Post-mortem of my time on the TC
by Zane Bitter 30 Mar '20

30 Mar '20

As promised last year, I will not be running for a third term as a member of the Technical Committee. I'm stepping down to spend more time with my family (no, really! ;) I thought this would be a good opportunity to talk to those folks who are thinking of running for a seat, or who aren't but should be. The most common question I hear from potential candidates is "what should I actually do on the TC?" I can't tell you what *you* should do, but I can tell you what I did and how that worked out. Maybe that will give you the flavour. And perhaps (he hinted) some of the other outgoing TC members can do the same to provide more of a cross-section. * I drafted and edited the review guide, "How to Review Changes the OpenStack Way", to try to ensure that the best parts of our review culture are evenly distributed across the project: https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/review-the-openstack-way.html (This started as part of an initiative from Julia Kreger to reduce nitpicking in reviews.) In theory anybody could have done this, but in practice I think this is one of those things that only somebody elected to the TC could have driven. I received a lot of feedback afterwards (which is unusual for anything the TC does): several people, and one whole team, mentioned that they had tweaked their reviewing style after this discussion. And hearing their feedback prompted me to tweak my own reviewing style as well. * I drafted and edited the Vision for OpenStack Clouds: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html. This was a ton of work as it involved consulting with so many people: first, folks in the community who on the surface appeared to have quite different visions for what OpenStack should be, who later turned out to not be so far apart as we all thought. After a lengthy round of reviews, I approached every project team individually to explain the specific relevance to them, and seek their feedback. Finally, I presented it to the OSF Board and held an in-person feedback session at the Forum, after all of which it was approved by the TC. I have some mixed feelings about the success of this. I still believe it was desperately needed... in about 2013. Now the Kubernetes community is succeeding at engaging with actual end users (not just operators), which OpenStack has always failed to do. With contributions to OpenStack dropping, it's not clear that we can, or necessarily should, sustain such a broad vision. It is my hope that if and when the community needs to discuss adjusting our scope, we will do so by amending this document - going through it section by section and deciding which parts to double down on and which to allow to fall by the wayside - and not by a series of ad-hoc actions that leave everybody confused as to what the project is supposed to be once again. On a personal level, the vision has been extremely valuable for me because it required me to spend a lot of time thinking deeply about the various components of OpenStack and how they fit into a greater purpose. A large portion of the value comes from participating in the process, not necessarily the final document. I hope that all of the folks who helped along the way got as much out of it as I did. * I developed the process by which we keep OpenStack up to date with new releases of Python: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20181024-python-update-proc… I also shepherded it through the first couple of release cycles, to try to entrench it as a standard part of each release. (BTW this task needs somebody to take it over.) This mostly involved pointing people back to the resolution and inviting them to formally update it every time someone tried to bikeshed the details, which happened more than I ever believed possible. (To date there have been no changes proposed to the resolution.) * I engaged with the OSF Board to pass on feedback from members in the developer community on the process for adding new Open Infrastructure projects (e.g. Zuul, StarlingX, Airship, Kata). Sometimes the work of the TC is completely invisible! I also tried to convey information the other way, publicising information that was otherwise only available by attending board meetings. (Most TC members usually attend board meetings, including the in-person joint leadership meetings held before Summits.) * In response to feedback from the board, I replaced the "Help Most Wanted" list with the "Upstream Investment Opportunities" list, and kick-started the rewriting of the existing entries in a format that is more targeted at decision-makers: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/upstream-investment-opportuni… (Huge thanks to Tom Barron, who did even more work to complete the job of converting all of the existing entries - proof that you don't need to be a TC member to start contributing to governance activities.) It remains to be seen whether this will have any effect, but this content is now being shared in the community newsletter, and the board is making moves to use it to actively solicit contributions to the community. Previously they felt unable to make use of the Help Most Wanted list because it was written with the wrong audience in mind. * I tweaked the guidelines for the release naming system to better align with our actual practice, because they had diverged somewhat. Believe it or not, this one issue took up more of the TC's time than any other thing that happened in 2019, and I'm very glad that we ended up not needing these tweaks because we eventually replaced the process wholesale, with one that makes it explicit that the TC is ultimately accountable for the release name not causing any international incidents or other snafus. * I researched and documented a design, developed during extensive discussions with many members of the technical community, for a new kind of simplified cloud built partially using OpenStack components but designed to be Kubernetes-native first: Project Teapot https://governance.openstack.org/ideas/ideas/teapot/index.html I do think this is worth building, but if nothing else I really hope this helps bring into focus the parts of OpenStack that remain essential in a Kubernetes-centric world. In writing this I was very much guided by the Vision for OpenStack Clouds as well as the ways in which Kubernetes expects to interact with an underlying cloud. I think we need more of these kinds of exercises, and while they don't have to be sponsored by TC members, I think it helps. If there's a pattern here it's this: take something that's implicitly agreed upon by the community (whether we realise it or not), write it down, seek feedback, and make it explicit so that anyone can refer to it, rather than leaving it as closely held tribal knowledge. Of course it goes without saying that I was involved in many more discussions and reviews that were led by others. I'll leave it to them to talk about those. And it should also go without saying that all of the work listed above was greatly improved by the input of the many talented folks in our community who contributed. In my humble opinion OpenStack is the best open source community of its size ever created. That's because we believe not just in one 'open' (source), but four (https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html) because we're committed to using open tools to build open software; and because, while it's certainly not the case that we can't improve, we have managed to do this while avoiding a widespread culture of bullying. To do all of this on the scale of OpenStack was, as far as I know, completely without precedent. (Perhaps the ASF comes closest, but its projects operate independently, unlike OpenStack subprojects.) All of us should be proud of this achievement. But it didn't happen by accident: it is the product of concerted effort by leaders in our community over the course of a decade. It's been a tremendous privilege to work alongside some of those folks, both before, during and (hopefully) after my time on the TC. I have learned so much from them. Now it is time for others to step up and continue to build that legacy, as the project evolves and adapts over time. The diversification of the OSF also gives us the opportunity to spread our ethos to other projects under the same umbrella, and from there to the open source community as a whole. However, we must remember that having a great community is not enough. To remain relevant, we also need to produce software that meets users' needs, which change over time. By an accident of fate I have approached OpenStack from a different direction than most - I came to OpenStack via the Heat project, which means I've always looked at it from an outside-in standpoint: users are building cloud applications, how can OpenStack provide them with what they need from a cloud through an open API? Many others, by necessity, have approached it from the inside-out: we have all this hardware, how can we expose its capabilities to users? I think it is fair to say that many of these folks and I have found each other's views to be mutually incomprehensible over the years. In writing up the Teapot design, I have learned a lot more about the other perspective. I believe we will need a more people to also grow their understanding in the opposite direction to avoid the trap of most capital-E "Enterprise" software - designed to check the boxes of those who decide what products to buy, but widely hated by all those forced to actually use it. Future TCs will have to grapple with this because nobody else in the community is really empowered to do so. The openstack/ideas repo that JP created is a great place for anybody to start documenting ways that we can improve. For my part, this is not goodbye. However, I have already been splitting my time between OpenStack and metal3.io and I expect that the drift in the other direction will only accelerate now that I no longer have any formal responsibilities here. Please feel free to contact me or ask questions if you think I can help. Stay safe out there, and by "out there" I mean physically isolated in your own homes for the next little while. cheers, Zane.

5 4

[mistral][ptl][election] PTL candidacy for Victoria
by Renat Akhmerov 30 Mar '20

30 Mar '20

Hi, I'm Renat Akhmerov. I'd like to announce my PTL candidacy for Mistral in Victoria cycle. In Ussuri, we kept improving Mistral performance to address use cases that desperately needed it. For the most complex known workflows the execution time has now dropped by 5-6 times. Besides lots of performance changes we also achieved: * Restructured the documentation completely * Fixed a number of documentation pages and added several new ones. There's still a lot to do on that though. * Made a big refactoring of Mistral actions and moved all OpenStack actions into mistral-extra repo. * Added namespaces for actions and workbooks * Added a new cookiecutter-based template for creating Mistral action projects. * Fixed a number of important bugs (for "join" tasks, scheduler etc.). * And lots of other changes.. For V cycle I'd like to keep making Mistral more usable: * Consistent and well-structured documentation * More ways to create Mistral actions (including action providers) * Additional tools that simplify creating custom actions and functions for Mistral * Easier debugging of workflow errors * Easier and smoother installation process We're already making a good progress with all that and anybody who wants to participate is very welcome onboard. The best way to get in touch with us is IRC channel #openstack-mistral or the openstack-discuss mailing list (with [mistral] tag in email subject). [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/715837/ Thanks Renat Akhmerov @Nokia

1 0

[election][glance] PTL candidacy for Victoria
by Abhishek Kekane 29 Mar '20

29 Mar '20

Hi All, I would like to announce my candidacy for Glance PTL for the Victoria cycle. Over the past couple of years we've had a small team looking after Glance and planned the priorities accordingly. During Ussuri cycle we were able to add a couple of important features related edge computing, plugin for image decompression, restored s3 driver support in glance-store, removed deprecated sheepdog driver and fixed some important bugs. Should community to select me as PTL for Victoria cycle I would keep driving the key priorities. Production stability, finishing the work we've had in flight and focus on the feature needs related to Edge computing. Thank you for taking my self nomination into consideration, Abhishek Kekane (abhishekk)

1 0

[election][cinder] PTL candidacy for Victoria
by Brian Rosmaita 29 Mar '20

29 Mar '20

Hello everyone, I would like to announce my candidacy for Cinder PTL for the Victoria cycle. Given that I'm the current PTL, you already have a pretty good idea of what things will be like on the Cinder project with me in that role and whether or not it would be a good idea for me to continue. So instead of bribing you with campaign promises, I'd like to take this opportunity to look at the current state of the project and what things look like for the Victoria cycle. The Cinder community remained fairly stable from Train to Ussuri, which was great in these downsizing times. Some of the drivers that were marked 'unsupported' for the Train release have been restored to 'supported' status during the Ussuri cycle. Some, however, have not. We relaxed the removal policy to give vendors more time to address CI issues and to make it easier for operators using such drivers. We'll see during the Victoria cycle whether this actually encourages the vendors of drivers that have been declared 'unsupported' to get their third-party CIs running again and having the drivers reinstated. During Ussuri, the team gained more testing expertise, particularly around creating more scenario tests, though this hasn't been reflected yet in committed code. As we get more scenario tests into the cinder-tempest-plugin, we'll be able to catch more bugs that affect multiple drivers, whereas now what mostly happens is that driver maintainers fix these piecemeal as they become aware that they affect their drivers. Thus, increasing the scnario test coverage will continue to be a focus in Victoria. The virtual PTG that we held as a follow-up to the Shanghai PTG was productive, as were the two virtual mid-cycle meetings we had this cycle. So I think we're in good shape to make the most of the fully virtual Victoria PTG. I think as a community, we're all doing good work on the Cinder project. We've got cinderlib to keep us relevant in a container-oriented world, and I think we're doing a solid job keeping the software stable and reliable. I'm sure the driver maintainers would like to see faster review turnaround (as would we all), so it will be a priority early in the cycle to identify contributors interested in becoming members of the cinder-core team and mentoring them along so that we can eventually increase the size of the core team during the cycle. In short, things are good, they could be better, and I'd like the opportunity to help drive the project as Victoria PTL. Thank you for your consideration, Brian Rosmaita (rosmaita)

1 0

[neutron] Bug deputy report (Mar 23 - Mar 29)
by Hongbin Lu 29 Mar '20

29 Mar '20

Hi all, I am on the bug deputy last week. Below is the bug deputy report: Critical: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868691 neutron-rally-task fails 100% on stable branches https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869034 Postgresql periodic job failing every day High: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868724 KeyError 'gateway_ip' in neutron/services/segments/plugin.py Medium: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869057 extension "subnet_dns_publish_fixed_ips" named wrong in the docs Low: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868515 vpnaas ike policy is not allowed to be updated https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868686 ovsdb_timeout config option isn't used to set when adding manager https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868933 [fwaas] Update the rules for firewall group without ports will cause the status to change from inactive to active https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869121 [FWaaS] Can't add rule with destination_port large than source_port https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869342 OVNMechanismDriver _ovn_client is a read-only property Cannot triage (need help from lieutenants): https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1868697 [ovn] transaction error: {"details":"Transaction causes multiple rows in \"MAC_Binding\" table to have identical values https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869129 neutron accepts CIDR in security groups that are invalid in ovn https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869244 RowNotFound: Cannot find Bridge with name=tbr-XXXXXXXX-X when using trunk bridges with DPDK vhostusermode https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869354 FIP isn't properly created for octavia loadbalancers Invalid: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1869136 Use public flat network to create vm faild Best regards, Hongbin

1 0

Re:[qa] Proposing Martin Kopec to Tempest core (Ghanshyam Mann)
by prakash RAMCHANDRAN 28 Mar '20

28 Mar '20

+1 Message: 4 Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 20:43:08 -0500 From: Ghanshyam Mann <gmann(a)ghanshyammann.com> To: "openstack-discuss" <openstack-discuss(a)lists.openstack.org> Subject: [qa] Proposing Martin Kopec to Tempest core Message-ID: <17123f4f761.126cbb10d108731.5702022165643836936(a)ghanshyammann.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello Everyone, Martin Kopec (IRC: kopecmartin) has been doing great contribution in Tempest since a long time. He has been doing bugs Triage also in Ussuri cycle and has good understanding of Tempest. I would like to propose him for Tempest Core. You can vote/feedback on this email. If no objection by the end of this week, I will add him to the list. -gmann ------------------------------ Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

1 0

podman pull failed: Trying to pull Image
by Md. Ziaul Haque 28 Mar '20

28 Mar '20

Hi I have faced a problem with overcloud deploy. If anybody faces the same problem, please suggest to me how I shall solve this problem. My triple version is stein Here I have attached the ansible log [root@controller2 ~]# podman pull 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo Trying to pull 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo...ERRO[0000] Error pulling image ref // 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo: Error initializing source docker:// 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo: pinging docker registry returned: Get https://192.168.90.10:8787/v2/: http: server gave HTTP response to HTTPS client Failed Error: error pulling image " 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo": unable to pull 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo: unable to pull image: Error initializing source docker:// 192.168.90.10:8787/tripleostein/centos-binary-iscsid:current-tripleo: pinging docker registry returned: Get https://192.168.90.10:8787/v2/: http: server gave HTTP response to HTTPS client =========================================================== [root@controller2 ~]# podman info host: BuildahVersion: 1.9.0 Conmon: package: podman-1.4.4-4.el7.centos.x86_64 path: /usr/libexec/podman/conmon version: 'conmon version 0.3.0, commit: unknown' Distribution: distribution: '"centos"' version: "7" MemFree: 11154231296 MemTotal: 16655982592 OCIRuntime: package: runc-1.0.0-65.rc8.el7.centos.x86_64 path: /usr/bin/runc version: 'runc version spec: 1.0.1-dev' SwapFree: 4294963200 SwapTotal: 4294963200 arch: amd64 cpus: 8 hostname: controller2 kernel: 3.10.0-1062.18.1.el7.x86_64 os: linux rootless: false uptime: 17h 37m 6.86s (Approximately 0.71 days) registries: blocked: null insecure: null search: - registry.access.redhat.com - docker.io - registry.fedoraproject.org - quay.io - registry.centos.org store: ConfigFile: /etc/containers/storage.conf ContainerStore: number: 0 GraphDriverName: overlay GraphOptions: null GraphRoot: /var/lib/containers/storage GraphStatus: Backing Filesystem: xfs Native Overlay Diff: "true" Supports d_type: "true" Using metacopy: "false" ImageStore: number: 0 RunRoot: /var/run/containers/storage VolumePath: /var/lib/containers/storage/volumes If I set insecure registry by manual than it pulls the image Thanks Ziaul

1 2

[sdk][osc][ptl][election] OpenStackSDK PTL Nomination
by Monty Taylor 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hi everybody! I'd like to run for PTL of OpenStackSDK again. We just merged the OpenStackClient and OpenStackSDK teams. While on the one hand this is a nice big new challenge, I think it also presents an excellent opportunity to accelerate our long-standing goal of integrating the two more seamlessly. I'm excited to get some motion on that. In this last cycle we finally got started on the long-awaited python-*client-ectomy from OpenStackClient by removing glanceclient. I'm hoping in the next cycle we can at least remove keystoneclient - but I think we can pick up the pace now. We need to streamline how config and arguments are parsed so that it's 100% consistent between OSC and SDK and Ansible. This is going to mean using openstack.config in OpenStackClient more directly - and I think it's going to mean an end to the double-auth dance. That, in turn, will likely tie in to attempting to unwind the plugin structure from entrypoints and laying in an optimization so that we can skip entrypoints calls in most cases. We've recently been more aggressive with adding new project-specific cores and I'd like to continue that. We need to trust people from project teams to help maintain relevant code in SDK and OSC, and as a result get into the habit of getting support for new things into SDK and OSC as a part of shipping them in the service. That leads to our need to get to the point where both SDK and OpenStackClient can speak to the latest microversion for the projects supporting microversions. This has been mentioned as one of the things people from the projects don't like about OSC vs the project-specific CLIs. The thing is, we will already use the most recent microversion we understand - so we already behave like people want us to. The thing we need to get to is understanding the MV as it's added. The momentum is picking up to get a lot accomplished, and I'd love to keep helping to pushing these rocks uphill. Thanks! Monty

1 0

[openstack-ansible] proposing Erik Berg to openstack-ansible core
by Mohammed Naser 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hi everyone, I'd like to propose adding Erik Berg to the OSA core team. They've been doing solid contributions with some activity in reviews and I think they'd be an excellent addition to the OSA team If no one opposes, I'll be adding them to the core team in the next few days. Regards, Mohammed -- Mohammed Naser — vexxhost ----------------------------------------------------- D. 514-316-8872 D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200 E. mnaser(a)vexxhost.com W. https://vexxhost.com

5 5

[tripleo] TripleO CI Summary: Sprint 44
by Rafael Folco 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Greetings, The TripleO CI team has just completed Sprint 44 / Unified Sprint 23 (Mar 05 thru Mar 25). The following is a summary of completed work during this sprint cycle: - Migrated stable branches from rdo-cloud to vexxhost - Upstream TripleO migrated to CentOS-8. - Upstream component pipeline <http://tripleo-cockpit.usersys.redhat.com/d/2tivP9BWz/component-pipeline?or…> done. - RDO content unpinned - First CentOS-8 promotion on March 16th - Promotion server is online and ready for CentOS-8 - Completed development of unified logging with tripleo-quickstart and infrared, roll out in progress Ruck/Rover Notes: - https://hackmd.io/7MBqFHurTA2e5H8kYRwgag The planned work for the next sprint [1] extends the work started in the previous sprint and focuses on the following: - TripleO-Operator-Ansible: contribute w/ code, docs, tests and zuul jobs. - Internal component pipeline: starting work - Unified tempest test skip list The Ruck and Rover for this sprint are Wesley Hayutin (weshay) and Sandeep Yadav (ysandeep). Please direct questions or queries to them regarding CI status or issues in #tripleo, ideally to whomever has the ‘|ruck’ suffix on their nick. Ruck/rover notes to be tracked in etherpad [2]. Thanks, rfolco [1] https://tree.taiga.io/project/tripleo-ci-board/taskboard/unified-sprint-24 [2] https://hackmd.io/XMd_vskSTdGZl7ruZ1UckA

1 0

[tc][elections] Nomination
by Donny Davis 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hello Openstack Humanoids, My name is Donny Davis and I would like to announce my candidacy for TC. I built my first Openstack cloud by hand on the Grizzly release to provide a training environment for fellow employees who lacked Satellite equipment to train on. I have spent subsequent years of my life building, maintaining, operating, and teaching other people how to Openstack. I contribute Openstack CI resources via Fort Nebula (last cycle), and this cycle via Open Edge. This is a cloud that has been tuned specifically for the Openstack Community CI workload. I support many of the obscure requirements to run non-standard CI jobs on this cloud. This Openstack deployment is all my personal equipment and is 100% privately funded. In the last cycle my commit for test instances was mostly 50 concurrent jobs, and this cycle is mostly 40. As a member of the TC, I bring close to a decade of experience as an Operator. I feel the Openstack community can continue to deliver quality code while focusing on easing the burden of getting Openstack clouds into production. For a long time the focus of this community has been to develop bleeding edge features to deliver technical value to consumers. Now this community should focus on making those features easier to consume. I can view the TC through the eyes of a builder, tinkerer, trainer, and long time operator of Openstack. Thank you for your consideration. -- ~/DonnyD C: 805 814 6800 "No mission too difficult. No sacrifice too great. Duty First"

1 0

[ironic][ops] Stable Ocata and Pike branches are now Unmaintained
by Iury Gregory 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Greetings Ironicers and Operators, During the ironic upstream meeting held on 09 March 2020, we decided to move stable/ocata and stable/pike to unmaintained [1]. Apologies for sending this email almost 3 weeks after the decision was made. We have documented what unmaintained means in our contributor docs [2]. Feel free to rise any questions here or in the irc channel (#openstack-ironic) [1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-ironic/%23openstack-iro… [2] https://docs.openstack.org/ironic/latest/contributor/#our-policy-for-stable… Best regards, -- *Att[]'sIury Gregory Melo Ferreira * *MSc in Computer Science at UFCG* *Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech* *Social*: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory *E-mail: iurygregory(a)gmail.com <iurygregory(a)gmail.com>*

1 0

openstack-dev Tacker
by Akshata Jitendra Gage 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hello, I am new to Tacker. As mentioned in the installation guide i have installed tacker on my server. I need to know that is there any way available by which we can create "service function chaining" via Horizon? And is there any forum related to tacker on which i can raise my doubts and questions? Thanks & Regards Akshata Gage

2 1

[election][neutron] PTL nomination
by Slawek Kaplonski 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hi, I want to propose my candidacy for Neutron PTL in the Victoria cycle. I have been serving this great team as PTL in the Ussuri cycle already and I would love to continue this in the next cycle as well. Ussuri was my first time as PTL and I learned a lot during this cycle. I think that this new experience and knowledge which I now have will help me serve as PTL in this next cycle as well. In Ussuri I proposed a couple major goals which I wanted to focus on: * merge networking-ovn driver into main Neutron repository - in Ussuri we actually merged networking-ovn code into neutron and made ovn driver as one of the main in-tree drivers for ML2. We also merged the networking-ovn core team into the neutron core team. * Improve overall stability of our CI - we are continuously working to improve CI stability: during this cycle we added couple OVN related jobs to Neutron CI, and we also removed some unnecessary jobs. Unfortunately we didn’t make enough progress with our CI and some jobs still need a lot of work to improve their stability. I think that this is a continuous effort and we will need to focus on it in the next cycle as well. * Improve test coverage for existing features - we introduced many new test cases in the neutron-tempest-plugin repository. Many of them are covering some additional scenarios and advanced functionality: multicast traffic, TCP and UDP port forwarding, and others. I think that this is a continuous effort and we will need to focus on that one in the next cycle as well. * Finish the transition to the new engine facade - this is something which we didn’t make enough progress so far and I would like to treat it as a priority in Victoria. * Improve the stability of Neutron when it is running under uWSGI - recently we promoted our uWSGI jobs to be voting. Those jobs are now pretty stable. I think that in the next cycle we need to finally focus on making uwsgi as the default in Devstack, so that it will be used in most Neutron CI job. In addition to that I wanted to continue Miguel’s way of mentoring potential new core reviewers and contributors, and I think that this has been working pretty fine. In addition to the networking-ovn core team which is now part of neutron core, we also have new core reviewer Lajos Katona and new member of drivers team: Nate Johnston. Our team is now in good shape and we have many active core reviewers and contributors. That’s my summary of what we actually achieved in the Ussuri cycle. Now let’s talk about what are my goals for the Victoria cycle. * Continue adoption of the OVN driver in Neutron - now that the OVN is in-tree, we need to think about making it the default in Devstack. * Finish adoption of new engine facade - it’s unfinished goal from the Ussuri cycle and I think that we should treat it as a priority now, * Metadata over IPv6 - we still have not finished the RFE about support for Metadata service in IPv6 only networks. In the Ussuri cycle we made some progress with the spec [1], and we also had some discussions about it with cloud-init developers. Now I think it’s time to finally get this spec merged and implement it in Neutron, * Continue work on test coverage and CI stability - this is a never ending story and I think that it should be treated with high priority all the time. It is my continuing desire to do my best to help our outstanding team to deliver better software and to grow. [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/315604/ — Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

1 0

[release] Release countdown for week R-6, March 30 - April 3
by Sean McGinnis 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Development Focus ----------------- Work on libraries should be wrapping up, in preparation for the various library-related deadlines coming up. Now is a good time to make decisions on deferring feature work to the next development cycle in order to be able to focus on finishing already-started feature work. General Information ------------------- We are now getting close to the end of the cycle, and will be gradually freezing feature work on the various deliverables that make up the OpenStack release. This coming week is the deadline for general libraries (except client libraries): their last feature release needs to happen before "Non-client library freeze" on April 2. Only bugfixes releases will be allowed beyond this point. When requesting those library releases, you can also include the stable/ussuri branching request with the review (as an example, see the "branches" section here: https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/pike/…) In the next weeks we will have deadlines for: * Client libraries (think python-*client libraries), which need to have their last feature release before "Client library freeze" (April 9) * Deliverables following a cycle-with-rc model (that would be most services), which observe a Feature freeze on that same date, April 9. Any feature addition beyond that date should be discussed on the mailing-list and get PTL approval. As we are getting to the point of creating stable/ussuri branches, this would be a good point for teams to review membership in their $project-stable-maint groups. Once the stable/ussuri branches are cut for a repo, the ability to approve any necessary backports into those branches for ussuri will be limited to the members of that stable team. If there are any questions about stable policy or stable team membership, please reach out in the #openstack-stable channel. Upcoming Deadlines & Dates -------------------------- Non-client library freeze: April 2 (R-6 week) Client library freeze: April 9 (R-5 week) Ussuri-3 milestone (including cycle highlights): April 9 (R-5 week) Cycle Highlights Due: April 9 (R-5 week) Ussuri final release: May 13

1 0

[neutron] Final release of non-client libraries
by Slawek Kaplonski 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hi, Next week is deadline for final releases for non-client libraries and I was checking what patches we are still in review and potentially we would need to have in Ussuri. *Neutron-lib* I see only https://review.opendev.org/#/c/712657/ which potentially may be good to get before final release. IMO it’s in good shape, please review it if You have few minutes (it’s small). *Ovsdbapp* There are 3 opened patches on https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/ovsdbapp+branch:master+sta… But I think that maybe only https://review.opendev.org/#/c/683355/ may be potentially needed, mostly by ovn subteam. So please check if this is needed and we should update it to make it in before final Ussuri release. Os-ken I don’t see any important patches waiting in the list https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/os-ken+branch:master+statu… so it should be good to go. If I missed anything or You have something else which You need to get in before this final release, please ping me by email or on irc. — Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

1 0

[all][tc] Meeting Agenda April 2nd
by Jean-Philippe Evrard 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hello everyone, Here are the report topics for the tc next meeting, April 2nd. A few of those are most likely noop, tbh. Feel free to join us! - Report on tc/uc merge (ttx) - Report on the analysis of the 2019 survey (jungleboyj), and survey 2020. - Report on telemetry after Rico's convo with the PTL (ricolin) - report on stable branch policy work: mnaser to push an update to distill what happened on the ML in terms of stable branch policy (mnaser) - report on the community goals for U and V, py2 drop (gmann) - Moving OpenDev discussion forward (clarkb) - Report on the OSF board initiatives (mnaser) Please note that, as usual, the office hours are happening after the meeting, so if you want to chat over new things, it's a perfect place! Regards, Jean-Philippe Evrard

1 0

[tripleo][mistral] Farewell
by Dougal Matthews 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

Hey all, I am leaving Red Hat and my last day is tomorrow. As a result I will be moving on from OpenStack. I just wanted to say my farewells here and say thanks to everyone for all the fun over the years. As my last core duty I will be de-coring myself tomorrow :) If anyone wants to reach me beyond tomorrow, my email is probably best: dougal(a)dougalmatthews.com Cheers, Dougal

2 1

[nova][cinder] Why nova-api uses volume's size as bdm.volume_size?
by Zhi CZ Chang 27 Mar '20

27 Mar '20

1 0

[neutron] Drivers meeting - 27.03.2020
by Slawek Kaplonski 26 Mar '20

26 Mar '20

Hi, Due to lack of agenda for our next drivers meeting I will cancel it. I would like You to check list of opened, not triaged, old RFEs [1] and check if there are maybe some RFEs which You would like to continue work on, or maybe there are some which You think we should close as not needed anymore. Also if RFE on this list belongs to You, please respond to any questions from comments in this RFE or just let us know that You don’t want/don’t have time to continue work on it. Thx in advance [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bugs?field.tag=rfe — Slawek Kaplonski Senior software engineer Red Hat

1 0

[all][elections][ptl][tc] Combined PTL/TC Nominations Kickoff
by Kendall Nelson 26 Mar '20

26 Mar '20

Hello Everyone! Nominations for OpenStack PTLs (Project Team Leads) and TC (Technical Committee) positions (5 positions) are now open and will remain open until Mar 31, 2020 23:45 UTC. All nominations must be submitted as a text file to the openstack/election repository as explained at https://governance.openstack.org/election/#how-to-submit-a-candidacy Please make sure to follow the candidacy file naming convention: candidates/victoria/<Project_Name or "TC">/<email_address> (for example, "candidates/victoria/TC/stacker(a)example.org"). The name of the file should match an email address for your current OpenStack Foundation Individual Membership. Take this opportunity to ensure that your OSF member profile contains current information: https://www.openstack.org/profile/ Any OpenStack Foundation Individual Member can propose their candidacy for an available, directly-elected seat on the Technical Committee. In order to be an eligible candidate for PTL you must be an OpenStack Foundation Individual Member. PTL candidates must also have contributed to the corresponding team during the Train to Ussuri timeframe, Mar 22, 2019 00:00 UTC - Apr 07, 2020 00:00 UTC. Your Gerrit account must also have a verified email address matching the one used in your candidacy filename. Both PTL and TC elections will be held from Apr 07, 2020 23:45 UTC through to Apr 14, 2020 23:45 UTC. The electorate for the TC election are the OpenStack Foundation Individual Members who have a code contribution to one of the official teams over the Train to Ussuri timeframe, Mar 22, 2019 00:00 UTC - Apr 07, 2020 00:00 UTC, as well as any Extra ATCs who are acknowledged by the TC. The electorate for a PTL election are the OpenStack Foundation Individual Members who have a code contribution over the Train to Ussuri timeframe, Mar 22, 2019 00:00 UTC - Apr 07, 2020 00:00 UTC, in a deliverable repository maintained by the team which the PTL would lead, as well as the Extra ATCs who are acknowledged by the TC for that specific team. The list of project teams can be found at https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/projects/ and their individual team pages include lists of corresponding Extra ATCs. Please find below the timeline: nomination starts @ Mar 24, 2020 23:45 UTC nomination ends @ Mar 31, 2020 23:45 UTC campaigning starts @ Mar 31, 2020 23:45 UTC campaigning ends @ Apr 07, 2020 23:45 UTC elections start @ Apr 07, 2020 23:45 UTC elections end @ Apr 14, 2020 23:45 UTC Shortly after election officials approve candidates, they will be listed on the https://governance.openstack.org/election/ page. The electorate is requested to confirm their email addresses in Gerrit prior to 2020-03-31 00:00:00+00:00, so that the emailed ballots are sent to the correct email address. This email address should match one which was provided in your foundation member profile as well. Gerrit account information and OSF member profiles can be updated at https://review.openstack.org/#/settings/contact and https://www.openstack.org/profile/ accordingly. If you have any questions please be sure to either ask them on the mailing list or to the elections officials: https://governance.openstack.org/election/#election-officials -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) & the Election Officials

3 2

[oslo] PTL Non-Candidacy
by Ben Nemec 26 Mar '20

26 Mar '20

This won't come as a surprise to most of you, but in case you missed the announcement at the beginning of this cycle I won't be able to serve as Oslo PTL for the next one. While I very much wish this were not the case, I do feel good about the current state of the Oslo team and I'm confident it will continue to do good things under someone else's leadership. Thanks to all of the Oslo contributors who have made the past two years a great experience! -Ben

4 3

[all][ptl] How to Contribute to the OpenStack Blog & Superuser Magazine
by Allison Price 26 Mar '20

26 Mar '20

Hey Stackers— We have received more questions recently about where the community can contribute content, especially on official OpenStack or community channels. Accompanied by the amount of events that have been transformed to virtual experiences, the OpenStack Foundation has been working on ways for the community to centrally share learnings online, and create a place where the community can send project, SIG, and overall community updates. Superuser and the OpenStack blog are community channels—for the community, by the community, so we would really like to get more contributors. We even had a user survey completed yesterday from an operator saying they wish the blog had more information on bug fixes and software updates, so here we are. Here’s how you can contribute: OpenStack Blog <https://www.openstack.org/blog/> We are reviving the OpenStack blog! Here, we want to publish OpenStack bug fixes, software updates, and project milestones that would be beneficial for users to know more about that may be more in depth. Often these are posted on the mailing list, which is great, but could also double as blog posts so that they are searchable in the future when operators stumble upon an issue. Once you have an idea of what you would like to share or have questions, please email community(a)openstack.org <mailto:community@openstack.org>. We can also keep track of a running list of ideas / calls for content for people who have questions that would be great to get answered on the blog. PTLs—heading into the Ussuri cycle, this is a great time to share your ideas on the etherpad around what you can write about. The OpenStack Foundation will reach out to folks who put their names or nicks in the etherpad as well as those who proactively reach out. Superuser <https://superuser.openstack.org/> Superuser has evolved to cover the open infrastructure landscape covering different use cases and open source projects. Whether it’s a video or an article, this content is typically more in depth than what you would see on a project blog and includes things like hands on tutorials, case studies, thought leadership articles, Q&As with open source community leaders, and updates and highlights from open source events around the world. If you have an idea you would like to share, fill out this form <https://superuser.openstack.org/contribute/> and the editorial team will reach out. If you have questions about whether your topic is the right fit, email editor(a)openstack.org <mailto:editor@openstack.org>. You can also attend the OSF community meeting <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2020-March/002856.html>next week to learn more about how you can get involved and contribute! Thanks! Allison Allison Price OpenStack Foundation allison(a)openstack.org

1 0