From jonathan at openstack.org Sun Mar 1 19:20:41 2020 From: jonathan at openstack.org (Jonathan Bryce) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2020 11:20:41 -0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] OpenDev infra as an OSF pilot project Message-ID: Hi everyone, I saw some of the discussions on different channels last week about the ongoing move of the OpenDev infra services out of OpenStack project and TC governance. One of the questions that was raised was around setting it up as an OSF pilot project. I wanted to send an email to this list to see if that was something the team was interested in moving forward on. As a pilot project, it would create some official standing for the new effort that would make it clear it’s something that is still supported by the OSF community and staff. It would also provide additional opportunities for education and exposure as part of the foundation’s overall activities. While the OpenDev infra services are somewhat different than the other projects we have piloted (e.g. Zuul), I think the process would still work and could be helpful to complete the transition to a more standalone community both from a governance and perception standpoint. Pilot projects are initiated through action of the foundation staff and over time may be confirmed by the Board as a top-level project with long-term support. I personally would be supportive of taking the pilot step, and would like to hear thoughts from those of you who are directly engaged in it. Thanks, Jonathan From cboylan at sapwetik.org Mon Mar 2 18:23:40 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 10:23:40 -0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] OpenDev infra as an OSF pilot project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0403f669-2553-44a5-b8bd-566d5f9c9acb@www.fastmail.com> On Sun, Mar 1, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I saw some of the discussions on different channels last week about the > ongoing move of the OpenDev infra services out of OpenStack project and > TC governance. One of the questions that was raised was around setting > it up as an OSF pilot project. I wanted to send an email to this list > to see if that was something the team was interested in moving forward > on. > > As a pilot project, it would create some official standing for the new > effort that would make it clear it’s something that is still supported > by the OSF community and staff. It would also provide additional > opportunities for education and exposure as part of the foundation’s > overall activities. While the OpenDev infra services are somewhat > different than the other projects we have piloted (e.g. Zuul), I think > the process would still work and could be helpful to complete the > transition to a more standalone community both from a governance and > perception standpoint. > > Pilot projects are initiated through action of the foundation staff and > over time may be confirmed by the Board as a top-level project with > long-term support. I personally would be supportive of taking the pilot > step, and would like to hear thoughts from those of you who are > directly engaged in it. I'm in favor of it. I think my biggest concern is that it could be awkward to sort through the confirmation process. Perhaps you could elaborate on how you think that might work given the current framework? Also, I'm not sure the entire infra team is familiar with this process so a bit more information on the process and what would be required of us would be useful. (I'd try but I'm sure to get it wrong). > > Thanks, > > Jonathan From cboylan at sapwetik.org Mon Mar 2 21:49:38 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:49:38 -0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Meeting Agenda for March 3, 2020 Message-ID: <8f3c7382-56ce-441a-8e3d-9a4cf9f8d4d0@www.fastmail.com> We will meet tomorrow, March 3, at 19:00UTC in #openstack-meeting with this agenda: == Agenda for next meeting == * Announcements * Actions from last meeting * Specs approval ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/709579/ Cleaning up python dev tools on our CI images. ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/709236/ Website activity stats ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710057/ xwiki for wikis * Priority Efforts (Standing meeting agenda items. Please expand if you have subtopics.) ** [http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/update-config-management.html Update Config Management] *** topic:update-cfg-mgmt *** Zuul as CD engine ** OpenDev *** Progress on Governance changes **** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2020-March/006603.html OpenDev as OSF pilot project **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710020/ Split OpenDev out of OpenStack governance. **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/703488 Updates to our project documentation with governance info * General topics ** Trusty Upgrade Progress (clarkb 20200303) *** Wiki updates ** static.openstack.org (ianw,corvus,mnaser,fungi 20200303) *** static.openstack.org transition should be complete including redirects. ** Discuss future IRC channel usage (frickler 20200226) *** We have both #openstack-infra and #opendev, maybe after the governance change we can now focus on using the latter? *** In particular the high number of duplicated gerritbot msgs is seen as an annoyance, some are even seen yet once more elsewhere, like for zuul/zuul. * Open discussion From corvus at inaugust.com Tue Mar 3 19:29:11 2020 From: corvus at inaugust.com (James E. Blair) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 11:29:11 -0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] OpenDev infra as an OSF pilot project In-Reply-To: <0403f669-2553-44a5-b8bd-566d5f9c9acb@www.fastmail.com> (Clark Boylan's message of "Mon, 02 Mar 2020 10:23:40 -0800") References: <0403f669-2553-44a5-b8bd-566d5f9c9acb@www.fastmail.com> Message-ID: <87imjlp794.fsf@meyer.lemoncheese.net> "Clark Boylan" writes: > On Sun, Mar 1, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I saw some of the discussions on different channels last week about the >> ongoing move of the OpenDev infra services out of OpenStack project and >> TC governance. One of the questions that was raised was around setting >> it up as an OSF pilot project. I wanted to send an email to this list >> to see if that was something the team was interested in moving forward >> on. >> >> As a pilot project, it would create some official standing for the new >> effort that would make it clear it’s something that is still supported >> by the OSF community and staff. It would also provide additional >> opportunities for education and exposure as part of the foundation’s >> overall activities. While the OpenDev infra services are somewhat >> different than the other projects we have piloted (e.g. Zuul), I think >> the process would still work and could be helpful to complete the >> transition to a more standalone community both from a governance and >> perception standpoint. >> >> Pilot projects are initiated through action of the foundation staff and >> over time may be confirmed by the Board as a top-level project with >> long-term support. I personally would be supportive of taking the pilot >> step, and would like to hear thoughts from those of you who are >> directly engaged in it. > > I'm in favor of it. I think my biggest concern is that it could be > awkward to sort through the confirmation process. Perhaps you could > elaborate on how you think that might work given the current > framework? Also, I'm not sure the entire infra team is familiar with > this process so a bit more information on the process and what would > be required of us would be useful. (I'd try but I'm sure to get it > wrong). I also think this would be a good outcome. I'm in favor of the additional formal ties this would provide. I share Clark's questions about the applicability of the current criteria; I'm sure we can work through it if the will is there, but it sounds like some changes may be required. Considering that this effort has been ongoing for two years, with generally positive feedback and support along the way, perhaps we could avoid blocking on this as a requirement to begin the official split from the openstack-infra project? It would be beneficial to try to start growing the OpenDev team as a distinct group. -Jim From pkomarov at redhat.com Tue Mar 3 10:38:33 2020 From: pkomarov at redhat.com (Pini Komarov) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:38:33 +0200 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Create new project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/creators.html and : https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/creators.html#preparing-a-new-git-repository-using-cookiecutter On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:32 AM Federico Ressi wrote: > Good morning, > > I am working on tobiko python test framework for testing disruptive > operations (node reboots, updates, upgrades, ...) against a pre installed > OpenStack. > > https://opendev.org/x/tobiko > > I would like to split above repository taking out test cases written with > the above framework to a new repository called for example: > > https://opendev.org/x/tobiko-os-tests (still to be created) > > I don't know how to create a new project on OpenDev service. Can you > please give me some hints to understand how to do it? > > Thank you in advance > Federico Ressi > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cboylan at sapwetik.org Mon Mar 9 19:54:30 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2020 12:54:30 -0700 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Team Meeting Agenda for March 10, 2020 Message-ID: We will meet in #openstack-meeting at 19:00 UTC (note the DST change in some parts of the world) March 10, 2020 with this agenda: == Agenda for next meeting == * Announcements ** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2020-March/002852.html OSF email on 2020 events ** DST change has happened in some parts of the world. Double check your calendar entries. * Actions from last meeting * Specs approval ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710057/ xwiki for wikis * Priority Efforts (Standing meeting agenda items. Please expand if you have subtopics.) ** [http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/update-config-management.html Update Config Management] *** topic:update-cfg-mgmt *** Zuul as CD engine ** OpenDev *** Progress on Governance changes **** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2020-March/006603.html OpenDev as OSF pilot project **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710020/ Split OpenDev out of OpenStack governance. **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/703488 Updates to our project documentation with governance info * General topics ** Trusty Upgrade Progress (clarkb 20200310) *** Wiki updates ** static.openstack.org (ianw,corvus,mnaser,fungi 20200310) *** Now down to cleanup of servers ** Discuss future IRC channel usage (frickler 20200310) *** Splitting the channels has begun. Openstack events removed from #opendev. *** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711106/1 if we get quorum on that change we can announce the migration then start holding people to it after an agreed on date. ** FortNebula now OpenEdge Cloud (clarkb 20200310) *** Has been redeployed and is being spun back up again. * Open discussion From cboylan at sapwetik.org Tue Mar 17 02:56:40 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:56:40 -0700 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Meeting Agenda for March 17, 2020 Message-ID: <29655bd7-c854-42ae-9176-e4b600c6d83b@www.fastmail.com> Sorry for the delay in getting this out. I had a power outage that kept my electronics off. We will meet with this agenda tomorrow, March 17 at 19:00UTC in #openstack-meeting: == Agenda for next meeting == * Announcements ** Switching to #opendev now - and merge https://review.opendev.org/#/c/711106/ ** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2020-March/002852.html OSF email on 2020 events * Actions from last meeting * Specs approval ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710057/ xwiki for wikis * Priority Efforts (Standing meeting agenda items. Please expand if you have subtopics.) ** [http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/update-config-management.html Update Config Management] *** topic:update-cfg-mgmt *** Zuul as CD engine ** OpenDev *** Progress on Governance changes **** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2020-March/006603.html OpenDev as OSF pilot project **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710020/ Split OpenDev out of OpenStack governance. This change merged. **** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/703488 Updates to our project documentation with governance info. Now we need to land this change. * General topics ** Trusty Upgrade Progress (clarkb 20200317) *** Wiki updates ** static.openstack.org (ianw,corvus,mnaser,fungi 20200317) *** Now down to cleanup of servers ** nb01.opendev.org adventures (clarkb 20200317) *** Podman and docker have different mount propagation rules. Switching back to docker for consistency of behavior. *** Will be redeployed as nb04.opendev.org to avoid hostname conflicts (even if not strictly required anymore). * Open discussion From ssbarnea at redhat.com Thu Mar 19 09:26:23 2020 From: ssbarnea at redhat.com (Sorin Sbarnea) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:26:23 +0000 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Should we use pip install --user ... in CI? Message-ID: <6270E2B1-D102-4C22-AB4D-FD1C3A3F5216@redhat.com> As I have a few pip tickets that I am closely monitoring two new interesting commends came at: https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/1668#issuecomment-600819050 In the past I used --user to install deps w/o messing the system package during the last year I went more and more often into very weird issues related to use of --user. Basically I ended with the conclusion that --user approach is not much better than messing the system and only a real virtualenv is reliable. I know that we already had talks about migrating zuul-jobs to install tools inside virtualenvs but this did not happen yet. I was told that the idea was to install each tool into each own virtulaenv in order to better isolate it from conflicts with others but I have some concerns regarding : a) making very hard or even impossible to use multiple tools in the same script, as they would exist in different envs. b) extra footprint on disk and install time. Do we really expect to have conflicts between lets say `tox` or `bindep`? I really doubt. This is why I would like to propose a default shared virtualenv to be used but allowing user to override the venv name. If we would have a "default" virtualenv at a specific location, it would be very easy to activate it at the start of each script. There are lots of places in tripleo* where pip --user is used and before trying to propose any changes there, I would like to know where are we going towards with zuul-jobs as I would like to avoid divergence in behaviours. Thanks Sorin Sbarnea From fungi at yuggoth.org Thu Mar 19 14:38:17 2020 From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:38:17 +0000 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Should we use pip install --user ... in CI? In-Reply-To: <6270E2B1-D102-4C22-AB4D-FD1C3A3F5216@redhat.com> References: <6270E2B1-D102-4C22-AB4D-FD1C3A3F5216@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20200319143816.766wbo26pgi5visr@yuggoth.org> On 2020-03-19 09:26:23 +0000 (+0000), Sorin Sbarnea wrote: [...] > I know that we already had talks about migrating zuul-jobs to > install tools inside virtualenvs but this did not happen yet. It actually has, tox is already available /usr/tox-env/bin/tox on our systems, we just haven't yet merged the change to stop installing a copy of tox into the system context (but that's coming). There's also a /usr/bindep-env/bin/bindep, a /usr/os-testr-env/ostestr and a /usr/glean/bin/glean (that last one could stand to become consistent with the others, I suppose). > I was told that the idea was to install each tool into each own > virtulaenv in order to better isolate it from conflicts with > others but I have some concerns regarding : > > a) making very hard or even impossible to use multiple tools in > the same script, as they would exist in different envs. We're talking about installing Python-based utilities into dedicated venvs. What you note is a concern for Python libraries. When is the last time you "imported" tox in a Python script? How about bindep? Remember that tox in one venv can call bindep from another venv just fine because those are being treated as command-line tools not Python modules (it's how I run them together on my own workstation even). Things which need to import each other should of course be installed into the same venv, that's just common sense. > b) extra footprint on disk and install time. [...] We're not planning on pre-installing more than a handful. Our node images are around 9GB in size, most of which is pre-cached data (Git repositories), and the venvs I listed account for 24KB of excess copies of files. That's something like a quarter of one percent of the image size you're concerned about optimizing. > There are lots of places in tripleo* where pip --user is used and > before trying to propose any changes there, I would like to know > where are we going towards with zuul-jobs as I would like to avoid > divergence in behaviours. If TripleO is installing things at job runtime, that seems like a different case than whatever we bake into our node images, and so doing it a different way is probably fine? -- Jeremy Stanley -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cboylan at sapwetik.org Mon Mar 23 21:50:10 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:50:10 -0700 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Meeting Agenda for March 24, 2020 Message-ID: <8e19ec50-2def-446a-b736-957012c2e6fa@www.fastmail.com> We will meet tomorrow, March 24, at 19:00 UTC in #openstack-meeting with this agenda: == Agenda for next meeting == * Announcements ** http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2020-March/002854.html PTG going virtual * Actions from last meeting * Specs approval ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710057/ xwiki for wikis ** https://review.opendev.org/714189 meetpad * Priority Efforts (Standing meeting agenda items. Please expand if you have subtopics.) ** [http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/update-config-management.html Update Config Management] *** topic:update-cfg-mgmt *** Gerrit on docker updates *** Zuul as CD engine ** OpenDev *** Progress on Governance changes **** TC change and our docs update have landed. **** We should probably elect the project lead? **** Need to start formalizing the Advisory Board membership *** Gitea restarts should be done in proper order preventing Gerrit replication from losing events. We should try and confirm this after a gitea image update. * General topics ** Trusty Upgrade Progress (clarkb 20200324) *** Wiki updates ** Future location of this meeting (clarkb 20200324) * Open discussion From samuel at silverliningsys.com Thu Mar 26 10:21:21 2020 From: samuel at silverliningsys.com (Samuel Abdullah) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 18:21:21 +0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Openstack using guacamole Message-ID: Hi, Would like to ask if it is possible to run guacamole in openstack environment? Seek for help on how would this be possible as i saw that guacamole component are part of the openstack in your murano project Looking forward for your reply Best Regards -- www.silverliningsys.com *Abu Bakar Samuel Abdullah* Cloud Infrastructure & Operations P: +603-2712-0081 M: +60.12.654.5938 E: samuel at silverliningsys.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paye600 at gmail.com Thu Mar 26 16:04:56 2020 From: paye600 at gmail.com (Roman Gorshunov) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:04:56 +0100 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] [Murano-Open-PaaS] Openstack using guacamole In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Samuel, Thanks for your email. Yes, Guacamole can be installed as an app via Murano. Discussions about Open PaaS are now in openstack-discuss mailing list. Please use the tag [Murano-Open-PaaS] in the subject line. I'm re-routing your email. Here are docs for the Murano project [0]. [0] https://docs.openstack.org/murano/latest/ Best regards, Roman Gorshunov On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 4:37 PM Samuel Abdullah wrote: > Hi, > > Would like to ask if it is possible to run guacamole in openstack > environment? > Seek for help on how would this be possible as i saw that guacamole > component are part of the openstack in your murano project > > Looking forward for your reply > > Best Regards > > -- > > > > www.silverliningsys.com > > > *Abu Bakar Samuel Abdullah* > > Cloud Infrastructure & Operations > > > P: +603-2712-0081 > > M: +60.12.654.5938 > > E: samuel at silverliningsys.com > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-Infra mailing list > OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From samuel at silverliningsys.com Thu Mar 26 18:09:41 2020 From: samuel at silverliningsys.com (Samuel Abdullah) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 02:09:41 +0800 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] [Murano-Open-PaaS] Openstack using guacamole In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Does Anyone know how can i install guacamole in openstack environment? Even if its via murano? Any manual guideline? Best Regards Samuel On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, 00:05 Roman Gorshunov, wrote: > Hello Samuel, > > Thanks for your email. Yes, Guacamole can be installed as an app via > Murano. > Discussions about Open PaaS are now in openstack-discuss mailing list. > Please use the tag [Murano-Open-PaaS] in the subject line. I'm re-routing > your email. > > Here are docs for the Murano project [0]. > > [0] https://docs.openstack.org/murano/latest/ > > Best regards, > Roman Gorshunov > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 4:37 PM Samuel Abdullah < > samuel at silverliningsys.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Would like to ask if it is possible to run guacamole in openstack >> environment? >> Seek for help on how would this be possible as i saw that guacamole >> component are part of the openstack in your murano project >> >> Looking forward for your reply >> >> Best Regards >> >> -- >> >> >> >> www.silverliningsys.com >> >> >> *Abu Bakar Samuel Abdullah* >> >> Cloud Infrastructure & Operations >> >> >> P: +603-2712-0081 >> >> M: +60.12.654.5938 >> >> E: samuel at silverliningsys.com >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-Infra mailing list >> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cboylan at sapwetik.org Mon Mar 30 21:34:26 2020 From: cboylan at sapwetik.org (Clark Boylan) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:34:26 -0700 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Meeting Agenda for March 31, 2020 Message-ID: We will meet at 19:00 UTC March 31, 2020 in #openstack-meeting with this agenda: == Agenda for next meeting == * Announcements * Actions from last meeting * Specs approval ** https://review.opendev.org/#/c/710057/ xwiki for wikis (this was rebased to address merge conflicts) * Priority Efforts (Standing meeting agenda items. Please expand if you have subtopics.) ** [http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/update-config-management.html Update Config Management] *** topic:update-cfg-mgmt *** Gerrit on docker updates **** manage-projects seems to be running properly now **** splitting manage-projects out into zuul driven playbook *** Zuul as CD engine ** OpenDev *** Progress on Governance changes **** TC change and our docs update have landed. **** We should probably elect the project lead? **** Need to start formalizing the Advisory Board membership *** Location of Meetings and communication **** #opendev-meeting is being prepped and should be ready for meeting April 7, 2020 **** service-discuss at lists.opendev.org for asynchronous communication *** Making the new user experience a bit more pleasant **** "Getting Started" links on https://opendev.org that point to new Getting started document in infra-manual * General topics ** Trusty Upgrade Progress (clarkb 20200331) *** Wiki updates * Open discussion From xavinux at gmail.com Tue Mar 31 22:16:17 2020 From: xavinux at gmail.com (Javier Romero) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:16:17 -0300 Subject: [OpenStack-Infra] Contribution to the OpenStack Infra. Message-ID: Hello Team, Hope your are well. My name is Javier, live in Argentina and work as a cloud engineer. Have been working as a Linux sysadmin for the las 10 years in an Internet service provider. Would like to know if I can start contributing with the OpenStack Infra. I have expierence with KVM virtualization and Docker containers. Thank you very much for your attention and sorry for the inconvenience. Best Regards, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: