From MM9745 at att.com Tue Feb 5 14:39:20 2019 From: MM9745 at att.com (MCEUEN, MATT) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:39:20 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship Dev Onboarding Resources Message-ID: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D093FD4@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Hi all, Here are a few onboarding resources for new Airship developers I thought I'd share, in approximately the order I'd recommend reading them (but feel free to mix and match). For all folks new to Airship, please let us know whenever the documentation isn't clear, or there's a gap. No documentation is 100% complete, but we want to prioritize the things that are most valuable to new developers (and operators). If you would like to contribute any updates or new documentation, it would be VERY welcome! Note that each Airship project also has its own documentation. Questions that come up are most welcome in the IRC channel or on the Mailing List. Airshipit.org - the front page for all things Airship https://www.airshipit.org/ Airship Wiki - links to stable releases, the Mailing List, weekly design call, weekly IRC meeting, etc https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship Airship Treasuremap overview of the stack, with links to individual projects https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ The developer Getting Started guide https://airshipit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev-getting-started.html Airship-in-a-Bottle full-stack demo/dev environment (single node) https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle Airskiff development environment for Airship (doesn't include bare metal provisioning or kubernetes) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/airskiff.html Airship-in-a-Bottle multinode gate script (virsh-based) https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate Airship site authoring gudie, for when you're ready to start engineering your own site definition https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html Thanks, Matt From kennelson11 at gmail.com Wed Feb 6 18:17:53 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 19:17:53 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] Denver Open Infrastructure Summit Community Contributor Awards! Message-ID: Hello Everyone! As we approach the Summit (still a ways away thankfully), its time to kick off the Community Contributor Award nominations[1]! For those of you that have never heard of the CCA, I'll briefly explain what they are :) We all know people in our communities that do the dirty jobs, we all know people that will bend over backwards trying to help someone new, we all know someone that is a savant in some area of the code we could never hope to understand. These people rarely get the thanks they deserve and the Community Contributor Awards are a chance to make sure they know that they are appreciated for the amazing work they do and skills they have. As always, participation is voluntary :) Nominations will close on April 14th at 7:00 UTC and recipients will be announced at the Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver[2]. Recipients will be selected by a panel of top-level OSF project representatives who wish to participate. Finally, congrats again to recipients in Berlin[3]! -Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) [1] https://openstackfoundation.formstack.com/forms/train_cca_nominations [2]https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ [3] http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/openstack-community-contributor-awards-berlin-summit-edition/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From georg.kunz at ericsson.com Thu Feb 7 13:37:17 2019 From: georg.kunz at ericsson.com (Georg Kunz) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 13:37:17 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] DNS and Ceph issues during deployment Message-ID: Hi all, We are trying to install Airship, but ran into some issues I'd like to bring up here. Specifically, we base our config on treasuremap tag v19.02.04 and see the following two problems: i) The ceph-rbd-provisioner pod tries to use service kube-dns although only coredns is deployed by Airship. Log: kubectl logs -n ceph ceph-rbd-provisioner-85f5b5bb8b-8vzc7 I0207 11:21:51.007104 1 leaderelection.go:156] attempting to acquire leader lease... I0207 11:21:51.014035 1 leaderelection.go:178] successfully acquired lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0 I0207 11:21:51.048705 1 event.go:218] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"ucp", Name:"mysql-data-mariadb-server-0", UID:"6e479917-2ac7-11e9-ab70-246e9657cd40", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"10655", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'Provisioning' External provisioner is provisioning volume for claim "ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0" E0207 11:21:51.249161 1 provision.go:199] error getting kube-dns service: services "kube-dns" not found I0207 11:22:16.379111 1 leaderelection.go:204] stopped trying to renew lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-1, timeout reached Related change: https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/pull/861/commits/99098beac2ff91e788b027f0e27d9e7f5ec5b769 We are wondering if that is a version selection problem (non-matching Kubernetes and DNS service), but we haven't touched the versions.yaml. ii) The ceph-rgw pod is not started on the Genesis node (nor on any other node; this is during an early phase before other nodes are provisioned); no related error in logs; all other ceph pods seem to be there. As a result, PVCs are not bound and database pods cannot start. site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: ceph-rgw: enabled site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: tenant-ceph-rgw: enabled # kubectl exec -n ceph ceph-mon-p7k6d -- ceph -s cluster: id: 7b7576f4-3358-4668-9112-100440079807 health: HEALTH_WARN 1 MDSs report slow metadata IOs Reduced data availability: 143 pgs inactive Degraded data redundancy: 143 pgs undersized services: mon: 1 daemons, quorum salmon-11 mgr: salmon-11(active) mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up {0=mds-ceph-mds-6774766c6-2n9tm=up:creating} osd: 1 osds: 1 up, 1 in data: pools: 18 pools, 143 pgs objects: 0 objects, 0 B usage: 111 MiB used, 372 GiB / 372 GiB avail pgs: 100.000% pgs not active 143 undersized+peered Did anybody run into this issue before or could point us in the right direction? Thanks a lot! Best regards Georg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ks3019 at att.com Thu Feb 7 15:55:11 2019 From: ks3019 at att.com (SKELS, KASPARS) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:55:11 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] DNS and Ceph issues during deployment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2ADBF0C373B7E84E944B1E06D3CDDFC91E69FFE0@MOKSCY3MSGUSRGI.ITServices.sbc.com> Hi Georg, the kube-dns seems an issue but I wonder if this could be the failing issue as the treasuremap reference (airship-seaworthy) site is being tested on frequent bases especially the tags released (here some info on it, https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seaworthy.html). I believe that current ceph configuration in globals require at least 3 OSDs (to fulfill 3x replication). Normally each OSD represents a disk - but you may use 3 folders on the same disk that could lead to a success. There is also possibility to fiddle with replication settings and turn them all to 1 https://github.com/openstack/openstack-helm-infra/blob/master/ceph-client/values.yaml#L186 Still - would very much recommend using more disks for production like bare-metal deployments. FYI - the kube-dns item is likely something that should be fixed. Kindly, Kaspars ________________________________ From: Georg Kunz [georg.kunz at ericsson.com] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 7:37 AM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Cc: Stefan Behrens; Rihab Banday Subject: [Airship-discuss] DNS and Ceph issues during deployment Hi all, We are trying to install Airship, but ran into some issues I’d like to bring up here. Specifically, we base our config on treasuremap tag v19.02.04 and see the following two problems: i) The ceph-rbd-provisioner pod tries to use service kube-dns although only coredns is deployed by Airship. Log: kubectl logs -n ceph ceph-rbd-provisioner-85f5b5bb8b-8vzc7 I0207 11:21:51.007104 1 leaderelection.go:156] attempting to acquire leader lease... I0207 11:21:51.014035 1 leaderelection.go:178] successfully acquired lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0 I0207 11:21:51.048705 1 event.go:218] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"ucp", Name:"mysql-data-mariadb-server-0", UID:"6e479917-2ac7-11e9-ab70-246e9657cd40", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"10655", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'Provisioning' External provisioner is provisioning volume for claim "ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0" E0207 11:21:51.249161 1 provision.go:199] error getting kube-dns service: services "kube-dns" not found I0207 11:22:16.379111 1 leaderelection.go:204] stopped trying to renew lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-1, timeout reached Related change: https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/pull/861/commits/99098beac2ff91e788b027f0e27d9e7f5ec5b769 We are wondering if that is a version selection problem (non-matching Kubernetes and DNS service), but we haven’t touched the versions.yaml. ii) The ceph-rgw pod is not started on the Genesis node (nor on any other node; this is during an early phase before other nodes are provisioned); no related error in logs; all other ceph pods seem to be there. As a result, PVCs are not bound and database pods cannot start. site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: ceph-rgw: enabled site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: tenant-ceph-rgw: enabled # kubectl exec -n ceph ceph-mon-p7k6d -- ceph -s cluster: id: 7b7576f4-3358-4668-9112-100440079807 health: HEALTH_WARN 1 MDSs report slow metadata IOs Reduced data availability: 143 pgs inactive Degraded data redundancy: 143 pgs undersized services: mon: 1 daemons, quorum salmon-11 mgr: salmon-11(active) mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up {0=mds-ceph-mds-6774766c6-2n9tm=up:creating} osd: 1 osds: 1 up, 1 in data: pools: 18 pools, 143 pgs objects: 0 objects, 0 B usage: 111 MiB used, 372 GiB / 372 GiB avail pgs: 100.000% pgs not active 143 undersized+peered Did anybody run into this issue before or could point us in the right direction? Thanks a lot! Best regards Georg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From georg.kunz at ericsson.com Thu Feb 7 16:25:41 2019 From: georg.kunz at ericsson.com (Georg Kunz) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 16:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] DNS and Ceph issues during deployment In-Reply-To: <2ADBF0C373B7E84E944B1E06D3CDDFC91E69FFE0@MOKSCY3MSGUSRGI.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2ADBF0C373B7E84E944B1E06D3CDDFC91E69FFE0@MOKSCY3MSGUSRGI.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: Hi Kaspars, Thank you for the response and the hint regarding the ceph issue. We will revisit our ceph config and either go for 3 directories or a lower replication level. Best regards Georg From: SKELS, KASPARS Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 4:55 PM To: Georg Kunz ; airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Cc: Stefan Behrens ; Rihab Banday ; BIRLEY, PETE ; MCEUEN, MATT ; REDDY, CHINASUBBA ; HELER, MATTHEW Subject: RE: DNS and Ceph issues during deployment Hi Georg, the kube-dns seems an issue but I wonder if this could be the failing issue as the treasuremap reference (airship-seaworthy) site is being tested on frequent bases especially the tags released (here some info on it, https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seaworthy.html). I believe that current ceph configuration in globals require at least 3 OSDs (to fulfill 3x replication). Normally each OSD represents a disk - but you may use 3 folders on the same disk that could lead to a success. There is also possibility to fiddle with replication settings and turn them all to 1 https://github.com/openstack/openstack-helm-infra/blob/master/ceph-client/values.yaml#L186 Still - would very much recommend using more disks for production like bare-metal deployments. FYI - the kube-dns item is likely something that should be fixed. Kindly, Kaspars ________________________________ From: Georg Kunz [georg.kunz at ericsson.com] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 7:37 AM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Cc: Stefan Behrens; Rihab Banday Subject: [Airship-discuss] DNS and Ceph issues during deployment Hi all, We are trying to install Airship, but ran into some issues I'd like to bring up here. Specifically, we base our config on treasuremap tag v19.02.04 and see the following two problems: i) The ceph-rbd-provisioner pod tries to use service kube-dns although only coredns is deployed by Airship. Log: kubectl logs -n ceph ceph-rbd-provisioner-85f5b5bb8b-8vzc7 I0207 11:21:51.007104 1 leaderelection.go:156] attempting to acquire leader lease... I0207 11:21:51.014035 1 leaderelection.go:178] successfully acquired lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0 I0207 11:21:51.048705 1 event.go:218] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"ucp", Name:"mysql-data-mariadb-server-0", UID:"6e479917-2ac7-11e9-ab70-246e9657cd40", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"10655", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'Provisioning' External provisioner is provisioning volume for claim "ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-0" E0207 11:21:51.249161 1 provision.go:199] error getting kube-dns service: services "kube-dns" not found I0207 11:22:16.379111 1 leaderelection.go:204] stopped trying to renew lease to provision for pvc ucp/mysql-data-mariadb-server-1, timeout reached Related change: https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/pull/861/commits/99098beac2ff91e788b027f0e27d9e7f5ec5b769 We are wondering if that is a version selection problem (non-matching Kubernetes and DNS service), but we haven't touched the versions.yaml. ii) The ceph-rgw pod is not started on the Genesis node (nor on any other node; this is during an early phase before other nodes are provisioned); no related error in logs; all other ceph pods seem to be there. As a result, PVCs are not bound and database pods cannot start. site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: ceph-rgw: enabled site/airship-seaworthy/profiles/host/cp_r630.yaml: tenant-ceph-rgw: enabled # kubectl exec -n ceph ceph-mon-p7k6d -- ceph -s cluster: id: 7b7576f4-3358-4668-9112-100440079807 health: HEALTH_WARN 1 MDSs report slow metadata IOs Reduced data availability: 143 pgs inactive Degraded data redundancy: 143 pgs undersized services: mon: 1 daemons, quorum salmon-11 mgr: salmon-11(active) mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up {0=mds-ceph-mds-6774766c6-2n9tm=up:creating} osd: 1 osds: 1 up, 1 in data: pools: 18 pools, 143 pgs objects: 0 objects, 0 B usage: 111 MiB used, 372 GiB / 372 GiB avail pgs: 100.000% pgs not active 143 undersized+peered Did anybody run into this issue before or could point us in the right direction? Thanks a lot! Best regards Georg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From l.legal.astellia at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 13:51:28 2019 From: l.legal.astellia at gmail.com (Loic Le Gal) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:51:28 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship Minimum virtualized config Message-ID: Hello Airshippers, I'm trying to set up a minimal platform with Airship inside VMs (yes nested virtualization in the air...) and I succeed to install a Genesis node on a VM m1.xlarge (8vCPU/16GB Ram/160GB HDD) with Airship-in-a-bottle / dev_minimal Procedure. As no minimal config SITE is defined can someone tell me: 1. if it is possible to use other VM which are playing the role of Controller/Worker Nodes to deploy a Site on ? That is no ILO/IDrac capability 2. What is the strict minimum number of Nodes (1Genesis + 1 Controller + 1 Compute) and resources ? I found these requirements https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html?highlight=shipyard#hw-sizing-and-minimum-requirements 24 vCPU are really needed for a Controller Node or could the Genesis also play this role ? What is the minimum for a Compute Node out of the Application layer usage? Thanks in advance. BR, Loïc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From georg.kunz at ericsson.com Mon Feb 11 08:18:41 2019 From: georg.kunz at ericsson.com (Georg Kunz) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 08:18:41 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship Minimum virtualized config In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Loic, I have been doing some development and testing recently using the multi-node gate scripts [1] which reside in the Airship-in-a-bottle repository. The scripts set up a couple of VMs (build, Genesis, workers) on a single server and deploys Airship in them. The default resource requirements look like this [2]. I have increased both vCPUs and RAM per VMs as I had spare resources, but the default works as well. [1] https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate [2] https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/blob/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate/airship_gate/manifests/multinode_deploy.json#L63 Best regards Georg From: Loic Le Gal Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 2:51 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship Minimum virtualized config Hello Airshippers, I'm trying to set up a minimal platform with Airship inside VMs (yes nested virtualization in the air...) and I succeed to install a Genesis node on a VM m1.xlarge (8vCPU/16GB Ram/160GB HDD) with Airship-in-a-bottle / dev_minimal Procedure. As no minimal config SITE is defined can someone tell me: 1. if it is possible to use other VM which are playing the role of Controller/Worker Nodes to deploy a Site on ? That is no ILO/IDrac capability 2. What is the strict minimum number of Nodes (1Genesis + 1 Controller + 1 Compute) and resources ? I found these requirements https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html?highlight=shipyard#hw-sizing-and-minimum-requirements 24 vCPU are really needed for a Controller Node or could the Genesis also play this role ? What is the minimum for a Compute Node out of the Application layer usage? Thanks in advance. BR, Loïc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From l.legal.astellia at gmail.com Tue Feb 12 13:31:48 2019 From: l.legal.astellia at gmail.com (Loic Le Gal) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 14:31:48 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship Minimum virtualized config In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Georg, Following your links, I found also the dev_single_node which deploy an AIO demo site. I will check them. BR, Loïc Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 09:18, Georg Kunz a écrit : > Hi Loic, > > > > I have been doing some development and testing recently using the > multi-node gate scripts [1] which reside in the Airship-in-a-bottle > repository. The scripts set up a couple of VMs (build, Genesis, workers) on > a single server and deploys Airship in them. The default resource > requirements look like this [2]. I have increased both vCPUs and RAM per > VMs as I had spare resources, but the default works as well. > > > > [1] > https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate > > [2] > https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/blob/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate/airship_gate/manifests/multinode_deploy.json#L63 > > > > Best regards > > Georg > > > > *From:* Loic Le Gal > *Sent:* Friday, February 8, 2019 2:51 PM > *To:* airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org > *Subject:* [Airship-discuss] Airship Minimum virtualized config > > > > Hello Airshippers, > > > > I'm trying to set up a minimal platform with Airship inside VMs (yes > nested virtualization in the air...) and I succeed to install a Genesis > node on a VM m1.xlarge (8vCPU/16GB Ram/160GB HDD) with Airship-in-a-bottle > / dev_minimal Procedure. > > > > As no minimal config SITE is defined can someone tell me: > > > > 1. if it is possible to use other VM which are playing the role of > Controller/Worker Nodes to deploy a Site on ? That is no ILO/IDrac > capability > > > > 2. What is the strict minimum number of Nodes (1Genesis + 1 Controller + 1 > Compute) and resources ? > > I found these requirements > https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html?highlight=shipyard#hw-sizing-and-minimum-requirements > > > 24 vCPU are really needed for a Controller Node or could the Genesis also > play this role ? > > What is the minimum for a Compute Node out of the Application layer usage? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > BR, > > > > Loïc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Tue Feb 12 17:06:20 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:06:20 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Denver PTG Attending Teams Message-ID: Hello! The results are in! Here are the list of teams that are planning to attend the upcoming PTG in Denver, following the summit. Hopefully we are getting it to you soon enough to plan travel. If you haven't already registered yet, you can do that here[1]. If you haven't booked your hotel yet, please please please use our hotel block here[2]. ----------------------------------------- Pilot Projects: - Airship - Kata Containers - StarlingX OpenStack Components: - - Barbican - Charms - Cinder - Cyborg - Docs/I18n - Glance - Heat - Horizon - Infrastructure - Ironic - Keystone - LOCI - Manila - Monasca - Neutron - Nova - Octavia - OpenStack Ansible - OpenStack QA - OpenStackClient - Oslo - Placement - Release Management - Requirements - Swift - Tacker - TripleO - Vitrage - OpenStack-Helm SIGs: - API-SIG - AutoScaling SIG - Edge Computing Group - Extended Maintenance SIG - First Contact SIG - Interop WG/RefStack - K8s SIG - Scientific SIG - Security SIG - Self-healing SIG ------------------------------------------ If your team is missing from this list, its because I didn't get a 'yes' response from your PTL/Chair/Contact Person. Have them contact me and we can try to work something out. Now that we have this list, we will start putting together a draft schedule. See you all in Denver! -Kendall (diablo_rojo) [1] https://www.eventbrite.com/e/open-infrastructure-summit-project-teams-gathering-tickets-52606153421 [2] https://www.hyatt.com/en-US/group-booking/DENCC/G-FNTE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raaldarm at syr.edu Fri Feb 15 00:52:10 2019 From: raaldarm at syr.edu (Rashed Ali Humaid Bindewill Aldarmaki) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:52:10 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle Message-ID: Faculty and students at Syracuse University are interested in the project. And a group of student are planning to deploy airship-in-bottle ( single device ) in the university’s lab as there capston project, there aim is to provide the students with technology for discovery in order to provide the community with solid feedback about the fantasist project. However, every time the group tries to deploy using the script available in gitHub it failes, when the script restart ( Kublet) and waiting for Kubernetes API availability it fail. The error said ( unable to connect to EOF and some time it say bad x509 unathurized user) Any recommendations will be highly appreciated Get Outlook for iOS -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From drewwalters96 at gmail.com Fri Feb 15 17:46:14 2019 From: drewwalters96 at gmail.com (Drew Walters) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 11:46:14 -0600 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Faculty and students at Syracuse University are interested in the project. > And a group of student are planning to deploy airship-in-bottle ( single > device ) in the university’s lab as there capston project, there aim is to > provide the students with technology for discovery in order to provide the > community with solid feedback about the fantasist project. However, every > time the group tries to deploy using the script available in gitHub it > failes, when the script restart ( Kublet) and waiting for Kubernetes API > availability it fail. The error said ( unable to connect to EOF and some > time it say bad x509 unathurized user) > > Any recommendations will be highly appreciated > Hello Rashed! We are excited that a group of your students have selected Airship-in-a-Bottle for their capstone project. In order to better assist, can you answer the following: 1. Are your students are using the dev_single_node environment? The dev_single_node environment is the same one found in the Airship-in-a-Bottle README. 2. Are your students running the script in a disposable environment as the root user? The wait_for_kubernetes api executes a simple kubectl command to retrieve the node list (which is likely where the 509 originates). You can safely ignore the EOF warnings. We also have some additional resources that ease the transition into working with Airship, if you are not yet familiar: Airshipit.org - the front page for all things Airship https://www.airshipit.org/ Airship Wiki - links to stable releases, the Mailing List, weekly design call, weekly IRC meeting, etc https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship Airship Treasuremap overview of the stack, with links to individual projects https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ The developer Getting Started guide https://airshipit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev-getting-started.html Airskiff development environment for Airship (doesn't include bare metal provisioning or kubernetes) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/airskiff.html Airship-in-a-Bottle multinode gate script (virsh-based) https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate Airship site authoring guide, (for engineering your own site definition) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html Lastly, our IRC channel, #airshipit on freenode, serves as a meeting location (every Tuesday at 14:00 UTC) and destination for general project discussion/questions. Airship developers tend to be more readily available there. In the meantime, we look forward to your response, welcome aboard! Regards, Drew Walters -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MM9745 at att.com Mon Feb 18 23:56:18 2019 From: MM9745 at att.com (MCEUEN, MATT) Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 23:56:18 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [airship-discuss] Meeting notes, agenda, and new proposed time slot Message-ID: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D177BB9@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> All, I wanted to share the agenda [1] and logs [2] for last week's IRC team meeting, since there was a lot of good discussion on: - New Airship Treasuremap monthly release - New Armada/Tiller locking strategy - New Pegleg security enhancements - New Shipyard pod structure - Proposal for new weekly meeting time - Governance docs The agenda for tomorrow's meeting is here [3]; you're welcome to add anything you'd like to discuss and to join us at 8am Central / 14:00 UTC! Based on feedback from a number of active meeting attendees, I propose moving the weekly Airship meeting back two hours to 10am Central / 16:00 UTC. We'll float this idea in tomorrow's meeting - feel free to discuss in response to this email as well. [1]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/airship-meeting-2019-02-12 [2]: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/airship/2019/airship.2019-02-12-14.00.log.html [3]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/airship-meeting-2019-02-19 Thanks, Matt McEuen From kennelson11 at gmail.com Wed Feb 20 02:41:02 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 18:41:02 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] Denver Forum Brainstorming Message-ID: Hello Everyone! Welcome to the topic selection process for our Forum in Denver! This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future project releases. For OpenStack Denver marks the beginning of Train’s release cycle, where ideas and requirements will be gathered. We should come armed with feedback from the upcoming Stein release if at all possible. We aim to ensure the broadest coverage of topics that will allow for multiple parts of the community getting together to discuss key areas within our community/projects. For OSF Projects (StarlingX, Zuul, Airship, Kata Containers) As a refresher, the idea is to gather ideas and requirements for your project’s upcoming release. Look to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum for an idea of how to structure fishbowls and discussions for your project. The idea is to ensure the broadest coverage of topics, while allowing for the project community to discuss critical areas of concern. To make sure we are presenting the best topics for discussion, we have asked representatives of each of your projects to help us out in the Forum selection process. There are two stages to the brainstorming: 1.If you haven’t already, its encouraged that you set up an etherpad with your team and start discussing ideas you'd like to talk about at the Forum and work out which ones to submit. 2. On the 22nd of February, we will open up a more formal web-based tool for you to submit abstracts for the most popular sessions that came out of your brainstorming. Make an etherpad and add it to the list at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2018 This is your opportunity to think outside the box and talk with other projects, groups, and individuals that you might not see during Summit sessions. Look for interested parties to collaborate with and share your ideas. Examples of typical sessions that make for a great Forum: - Strategic, whole-of-community discussions, to think about the big picture, including beyond just one release cycle and new technologies - eg Making OpenStack One Platform for containers/VMs/Bare Metal (Strategic session) the entire community congregates to share opinions on how to make OpenStack achieve its integration engine goal - Cross-project sessions, in a similar vein to what has happened at past forums, but with increased emphasis on issues that are of relevant to all areas of the community - eg Rolling Upgrades at Scale (Cross-Project session) – the Large Deployments Team collaborates with Nova, Cinder and Keystone to tackle issues that come up with rolling upgrades when there’s a large number of machines. - Project-specific sessions, where community members most interested in a specific project can discuss their experience with the project over the last release and provide feedback, collaborate on priorities, and present or generate 'blue sky' ideas for the next release - eg Neutron Pain Points (Project-Specific session) – Co-organized by neutron developers and users. Neutron developers bring some specific questions about implementation and usage. Neutron users bring feedback from the latest release. All community members interested in Neutron discuss ideas about the future. Think about what kind of session ideas might end up as: Project-specific, cross-project or strategic/whole-of-community discussions. There'll be more slots for the latter two, so do try and think outside the box! This part of the process is where we gather broad community consensus - in theory the second part is just about fitting in as many of the good ideas into the schedule as we can. Further details about the forum can be found at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum Thanks all! Kendall Nelson, on behalf of the OpenStack Foundation, User Committee & Technical Committee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From openstack at medberry.net Wed Feb 20 13:58:15 2019 From: openstack at medberry.net (David Medberry) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 06:58:15 -0700 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] Denver Forum Brainstorming In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Probably that should have been a link to: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 7:41 PM Kendall Nelson wrote: > > Hello Everyone! > > > Welcome to the topic selection process for our Forum in Denver! This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future project releases. > > > For OpenStack > > Denver marks the beginning of Train’s release cycle, where ideas and requirements will be gathered. We should come armed with feedback from the upcoming Stein release if at all possible. We aim to ensure the broadest coverage of topics that will allow for multiple parts of the community getting together to discuss key areas within our community/projects. > > > For OSF Projects (StarlingX, Zuul, Airship, Kata Containers) > > As a refresher, the idea is to gather ideas and requirements for your project’s upcoming release. Look to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum for an idea of how to structure fishbowls and discussions for your project. The idea is to ensure the broadest coverage of topics, while allowing for the project community to discuss critical areas of concern. To make sure we are presenting the best topics for discussion, we have asked representatives of each of your projects to help us out in the Forum selection process. > > > There are two stages to the brainstorming: > > > 1.If you haven’t already, its encouraged that you set up an etherpad with your team and start discussing ideas you'd like to talk about at the Forum and work out which ones to submit. > > > 2. On the 22nd of February, we will open up a more formal web-based tool for you to submit abstracts for the most popular sessions that came out of your brainstorming. > > > Make an etherpad and add it to the list at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2018 > > > This is your opportunity to think outside the box and talk with other projects, groups, and individuals that you might not see during Summit sessions. Look for interested parties to collaborate with and share your ideas. > > > Examples of typical sessions that make for a great Forum: > > Strategic, whole-of-community discussions, to think about the big picture, including beyond just one release cycle and new technologies > > eg Making OpenStack One Platform for containers/VMs/Bare Metal (Strategic session) the entire community congregates to share opinions on how to make OpenStack achieve its integration engine goal > > Cross-project sessions, in a similar vein to what has happened at past forums, but with increased emphasis on issues that are of relevant to all areas of the community > > eg Rolling Upgrades at Scale (Cross-Project session) – the Large Deployments Team collaborates with Nova, Cinder and Keystone to tackle issues that come up with rolling upgrades when there’s a large number of machines. > > Project-specific sessions, where community members most interested in a specific project can discuss their experience with the project over the last release and provide feedback, collaborate on priorities, and present or generate 'blue sky' ideas for the next release > > eg Neutron Pain Points (Project-Specific session) – Co-organized by neutron developers and users. Neutron developers bring some specific questions about implementation and usage. Neutron users bring feedback from the latest release. All community members interested in Neutron discuss ideas about the future. > > > Think about what kind of session ideas might end up as: Project-specific, cross-project or strategic/whole-of-community discussions. There'll be more slots for the latter two, so do try and think outside the box! > > > This part of the process is where we gather broad community consensus - in theory the second part is just about fitting in as many of the good ideas into the schedule as we can. > > > Further details about the forum can be found at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum > > > Thanks all! > > Kendall Nelson, on behalf of the OpenStack Foundation, User Committee & Technical Committee > > > > From rp2723 at att.com Wed Feb 20 19:06:57 2019 From: rp2723 at att.com (PACHECO, RODOLFO J) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:06:57 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Canceled: Airship - Open Design Call - AM EST Call Message-ID: <99088997CCAD0C4BA20008FD094344963274D1C8@MISOUT7MSGUSRDI.ITServices.sbc.com> Need to cancel the Airship Design Meeting this week Feb 20. 2019 Sorry for the late notice.!!! Etherpad for the Airship Open Design discussion https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Airship_OpenDesignDiscussions Storyboard in flight Specs https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/openstack/airship-specs Github Airship Specs https://github.com/openstack/airship-specs/tree/master/specs Inflight/reviewing specs https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+airship-specs __________________________________________ Join by video system i Dial rp2723 at attcorp.webex.com and enter your host PIN 02083790. You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number. Join by phone 1-844-517-1415 United States Toll Free 1-618-230-6039 United States Toll Access code: 733 333 726 Host PIN: 02083790 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 3346 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rp2723 at att.com Wed Feb 20 20:35:11 2019 From: rp2723 at att.com (PACHECO, RODOLFO J) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:35:11 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Canceled: Airship - Open Design Call - AM EST Call - Feb 20, 2019 Message-ID: <050A3162-AC56-4583-8107-7C4C5651ADBF@att.com> Need to cancel the Airship Design Meeting this week Feb 20. 2019 Sorry for the late notice.!!! Etherpad for the Airship Open Design discussion https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Airship_OpenDesignDiscussions Storyboard in flight Specs https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/openstack/airship-specs Github Airship Specs https://github.com/openstack/airship-specs/tree/master/specs Inflight/reviewing specs https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+airship-specs __________________________________________ Join by video system i Dial rp2723 at attcorp.webex.com and enter your host PIN 02083790. You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number. Join by phone 1-844-517-1415 United States Toll Free 1-618-230-6039 United States Toll Access code: 733 333 726 Host PIN: 02083790 Regards Rodolfo Pacheco Home/Office 732 5337671 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rp2723 at att.com Wed Feb 20 20:38:19 2019 From: rp2723 at att.com (PACHECO, RODOLFO J) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:38:19 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Canceled: Airship - Open Design Call - AM EST Call - Feb 21, 2019 Message-ID: <08486257-078A-4D81-85D2-B473DD51DC90@att.com> Need to cancel the Airship Design Meeting this week Feb 21. 2019 (Sorry for the multiple emails) Sorry for the late notice.!!! Etherpad for the Airship Open Design discussion https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Airship_OpenDesignDiscussions Storyboard in flight Specs https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/openstack/airship-specs Github Airship Specs https://github.com/openstack/airship-specs/tree/master/specs Inflight/reviewing specs https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+airship-specs __________________________________________ Join by video system i Dial rp2723 at attcorp.webex.com and enter your host PIN 02083790. You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number. Join by phone 1-844-517-1415 United States Toll Free 1-618-230-6039 United States Toll Access code: 733 333 726 Host PIN: 02083790 Regards Rodolfo Pacheco Home/Office 732 5337671 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raaldarm at syr.edu Thu Feb 21 21:00:31 2019 From: raaldarm at syr.edu (Rashed Ali Humaid Bindewill Aldarmaki) Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 21:00:31 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Hi Drew, Thank you for replying to the discussion. Just for clarification, I am the student working on this Capstone project. Sorry for replying late to your email as I had to clarify few things with the professor. To answer some of your questions: 1. * Are your students are using the dev_single_node environment? The dev_single_node environment is the same one found in the Airship-in-a-Bottle README. Yes I am using dev_single_node environment. 2. Are your students running the script in a disposable environment as the root user? The wait_for_kubernetes api executes a simple kubectl command to retrieve the node list (which is likely where the 509 originates). You can safely ignore the EOF warning Yes the script is run in disposable environment as root user. Appreciate your help. looking forward to discuss it further. Best, Rashed ________________________________ From: Drew Walters Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 5:46 PM To: Rashed Ali Humaid Bindewill Aldarmaki Cc: Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle Faculty and students at Syracuse University are interested in the project. And a group of student are planning to deploy airship-in-bottle ( single device ) in the university’s lab as there capston project, there aim is to provide the students with technology for discovery in order to provide the community with solid feedback about the fantasist project. However, every time the group tries to deploy using the script available in gitHub it failes, when the script restart ( Kublet) and waiting for Kubernetes API availability it fail. The error said ( unable to connect to EOF and some time it say bad x509 unathurized user) Any recommendations will be highly appreciated Hello Rashed! We are excited that a group of your students have selected Airship-in-a-Bottle for their capstone project. In order to better assist, can you answer the following: 1. Are your students are using the dev_single_node environment? The dev_single_node environment is the same one found in the Airship-in-a-Bottle README. 2. Are your students running the script in a disposable environment as the root user? The wait_for_kubernetes api executes a simple kubectl command to retrieve the node list (which is likely where the 509 originates). You can safely ignore the EOF warnings. We also have some additional resources that ease the transition into working with Airship, if you are not yet familiar: Airshipit.org - the front page for all things Airship https://www.airshipit.org/ Airship Wiki - links to stable releases, the Mailing List, weekly design call, weekly IRC meeting, etc https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship Airship Treasuremap overview of the stack, with links to individual projects https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ The developer Getting Started guide https://airshipit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev-getting-started.html Airskiff development environment for Airship (doesn't include bare metal provisioning or kubernetes) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/airskiff.html Airship-in-a-Bottle multinode gate script (virsh-based) https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate Airship site authoring guide, (for engineering your own site definition) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html Lastly, our IRC channel, #airshipit on freenode, serves as a meeting location (every Tuesday at 14:00 UTC) and destination for general project discussion/questions. Airship developers tend to be more readily available there. In the meantime, we look forward to your response, welcome aboard! Regards, Drew Walters -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MM9745 at att.com Thu Feb 21 21:31:07 2019 From: MM9745 at att.com (MCEUEN, MATT) Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 21:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1AFDE1@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Strange, we definitely expect that to work. As a sanity check, could you please give it one more try with the latest code from github, in case there was some issue that has been resolved? If you still see the error - any chance you can hop on our IRC channel so we can look at some of your logs, and try some things out -- #airshipit on Freenode IRC? We'll get you up and running! :) Thanks, Matt From: Rashed Ali Humaid Bindewill Aldarmaki Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2019 3:01 PM To: Drew Walters Cc: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle Hi Drew, Thank you for replying to the discussion. Just for clarification, I am the student working on this Capstone project. Sorry for replying late to your email as I had to clarify few things with the professor. To answer some of your questions: 1. * Are your students are using the dev_single_node environment? The dev_single_node environment is the same one found in the Airship-in-a-Bottle README. Yes I am using dev_single_node environment. 1. Are your students running the script in a disposable environment as the root user? The wait_for_kubernetes api executes a simple kubectl command to retrieve the node list (which is likely where the 509 originates). You can safely ignore the EOF warning Yes the script is run in disposable environment as root user. Appreciate your help. looking forward to discuss it further. Best, Rashed ________________________________ From: Drew Walters > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 5:46 PM To: Rashed Ali Humaid Bindewill Aldarmaki Cc: Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Airship-in-bottle Faculty and students at Syracuse University are interested in the project. And a group of student are planning to deploy airship-in-bottle ( single device ) in the university's lab as there capston project, there aim is to provide the students with technology for discovery in order to provide the community with solid feedback about the fantasist project. However, every time the group tries to deploy using the script available in gitHub it failes, when the script restart ( Kublet) and waiting for Kubernetes API availability it fail. The error said ( unable to connect to EOF and some time it say bad x509 unathurized user) Any recommendations will be highly appreciated Hello Rashed! We are excited that a group of your students have selected Airship-in-a-Bottle for their capstone project. In order to better assist, can you answer the following: 1. Are your students are using the dev_single_node environment? The dev_single_node environment is the same one found in the Airship-in-a-Bottle README. 2. Are your students running the script in a disposable environment as the root user? The wait_for_kubernetes api executes a simple kubectl command to retrieve the node list (which is likely where the 509 originates). You can safely ignore the EOF warnings. We also have some additional resources that ease the transition into working with Airship, if you are not yet familiar: Airshipit.org - the front page for all things Airship https://www.airshipit.org/ Airship Wiki - links to stable releases, the Mailing List, weekly design call, weekly IRC meeting, etc https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship Airship Treasuremap overview of the stack, with links to individual projects https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ The developer Getting Started guide https://airshipit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev-getting-started.html Airskiff development environment for Airship (doesn't include bare metal provisioning or kubernetes) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/airskiff.html Airship-in-a-Bottle multinode gate script (virsh-based) https://github.com/openstack/airship-in-a-bottle/tree/master/tools/multi_nodes_gate Airship site authoring guide, (for engineering your own site definition) https://airship-treasuremap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/authoring_and_deployment.html Lastly, our IRC channel, #airshipit on freenode, serves as a meeting location (every Tuesday at 14:00 UTC) and destination for general project discussion/questions. Airship developers tend to be more readily available there. In the meantime, we look forward to your response, welcome aboard! Regards, Drew Walters -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vkuzmin at mirantis.com Fri Feb 22 08:36:08 2019 From: vkuzmin at mirantis.com (Vladislav Kuzmin) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 12:36:08 +0400 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship StoryBoard is not available Message-ID: I read the docs https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship and trying to see issues on https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project_group/Airship. But this web page isn't available. Where I can find stories and issues for Airship? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paye600 at gmail.com Fri Feb 22 08:40:18 2019 From: paye600 at gmail.com (Roman Gorshunov) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:40:18 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Airship StoryBoard is not available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0F8E594E-E386-4FB1-9F03-CAE93E44F772@gmail.com> Hello Vladislav, I have just tried to open the link in your e-mail, and it worked. Or you could open Projects from the left-side panel, and enter airship in a search box. Best regards, — Roman Gorshunov > On 22 Feb 2019, at 09:36, Vladislav Kuzmin wrote: > > I read the docs https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Airship and trying to see issues on https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project_group/Airship . But this web page isn't available. Where I can find stories and issues for Airship? > _______________________________________________ > Airship-discuss mailing list > Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org > http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Fri Feb 22 17:24:27 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:24:27 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] Forum Submissions are Open! Message-ID: Hello Everyone! We are now accepting Forum [1] submissions for the 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your ideas through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget to put your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. The timeline for submissions is as follows: Feb 22nd | Formal topic submission tool opens: https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations. March 8th | Deadline for proposing Forum topics. Scheduling committee meeting to make draft agenda. March 22nd | Draft Forum schedule published. Crowd sourced session conflict detection. Forum promotion begins. March 29th | Scheduling committee final meeting April 5th | Forum schedule final April 29th-May 1st | Forum Time! If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to speakersupport at openstack.org. Cheers, Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rp2723 at att.com Fri Feb 22 19:11:27 2019 From: rp2723 at att.com (PACHECO, RODOLFO J) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:27 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Discuss target state implementation of Docker/Kernel/Os/Security Patches etc Message-ID: <99088997CCAD0C4BA20008FD0943449632757249@MISOUT7MSGUSRDI.ITServices.sbc.com> When: Occurs every Tuesday and Friday from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM effective 2/22/2019 until 3/15/2019. (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Where: https://attcorp.webex.com/join/rp2723 *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Discuss target state implementation of Airship Docker/Kubelet/Kernel/OS etc upgrade · I scheduled a series, will figure out when it’s appropriate What do we need to discuss ? · The ability to manage the delivery of any update across groups of hosts in a declarative way. · The ability to control disruption effects from those updates Next Meeting: Looking at the https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/metacontroller approach and comparing against what we discussed today. Everyone (in Airship Community) is welcome to participate on this discussions. Approach Discussed on our 1st Meeting https://go.gliffy.com/go/publish/12934972 Sample CR’s .. apiVersion: airship/v1 kind: MultiNodeAction metadata: name: DoSomethingPerRack spec: # List of sets of nodes that theis applies to. Indicates the cadence. 1 set at a time failureSet: set1: rack: rack1 set2: rack: rack2 # - Indicate the Action(What are we doing) - # - Indicate effect Upgrade and Reboot, Reboot Only, .. intentions: - UpgradeDockerAction - UpgradeKubeletAction - RebootAction ## This is teh CR that a node agent consumes apiVersion: airship/v1 kind: NodeAction metadata: name: Set1 spec: setIndicator: rack: rack1 intentions: ListOFActions: - UpgradeDocker - UpgradeKubelet - Reboot ## This is the CR's for ACTIONS that the NodeAgent ingests as well apiVersion: airship/v1 kind: Action metadata: name: Reboot spec: script ..... apiVersion: nc.att.com/v1 kind: Action metadata: name: UpgradeDocker spec: script ..... apiVersion: nc.att.com/v1 kind: Action metadata: name: UpgradeKubelet spec: script ..... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 4290 bytes Desc: not available URL: From MM9745 at att.com Wed Feb 27 00:24:12 2019 From: MM9745 at att.com (MCEUEN, MATT) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:24:12 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core Message-ID: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MM9745 at att.com Wed Feb 27 00:24:11 2019 From: MM9745 at att.com (MCEUEN, MATT) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:24:11 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core Message-ID: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Airship team, I'd like to nominate Drew Walters (dwalt) to become an Airship core reviewer. Drew has significant experience with Armada, and has more recently developed a focus on the reference manifests and CI infrastructure in the Treasuremap project. Drew has shown the quality and quantity of code reviews that demonstrate the value that he'll add as an Airship core, and he has also shown eagerness and leadership in growing the Airship community as a whole. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dangtrinhnt at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 06:14:40 2019 From: dangtrinhnt at gmail.com (Trinh Nguyen) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:14:40 +0900 Subject: [Airship-discuss] OpenInfra Day Vietnam 2019 - pre-CFP Message-ID: Hello, This is the pre-calling for presentations at the OpenInfra Day in Vietnam this year. If you love to visit Hanoi , the capital of Vietnam, and share your passion for the Open Infrastructure of any topic (container, CI, deployment, edge computing, etc.), please let me know by replying to this email. Below is the tentative information of the event: - Date: 31 August 2019 - Location: Hanoi, Vietnam We are working with the OpenStack Foundation to organize the Upstream Institute at the day so this will be a great opportunity for potential contributors to come and learn. There is also a couple of PTLs and projects core members have shown their interest in visiting Hanoi for this event. We will send out the official call-for-presentations after we've done with the logistic vendors and It would be around the beginning of May or sooner. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. See you in Hanoi :) Bests, On behalf of VietOpenInfra Group. P/S: Have a look at our last OpenInfra Day: https://2018.vietopenstack.org/ -- *Trinh Nguyen* *www.edlab.xyz * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From am495p at att.com Wed Feb 27 15:12:01 2019 From: am495p at att.com (MAHMOUDI, AHMAD) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:12:01 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: +1 From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Drew Walters (dwalt) to become an Airship core reviewer. Drew has significant experience with Armada, and has more recently developed a focus on the reference manifests and CI infrastructure in the Treasuremap project. Drew has shown the quality and quantity of code reviews that demonstrate the value that he'll add as an Airship core, and he has also shown eagerness and leadership in growing the Airship community as a whole. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From am495p at att.com Wed Feb 27 15:12:14 2019 From: am495p at att.com (MAHMOUDI, AHMAD) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:12:14 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: +1 From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ks3019 at att.com Wed Feb 27 15:58:34 2019 From: ks3019 at att.com (SKELS, KASPARS) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:58:34 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: <2ADBF0C373B7E84E944B1E06D3CDDFC91E6C2337@MOKSCY3MSGUSRGI.ITServices.sbc.com> +1 From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ks3019 at att.com Wed Feb 27 15:58:42 2019 From: ks3019 at att.com (SKELS, KASPARS) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:58:42 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: <2ADBF0C373B7E84E944B1E06D3CDDFC91E6C2343@MOKSCY3MSGUSRGI.ITServices.sbc.com> +1 From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Drew Walters (dwalt) to become an Airship core reviewer. Drew has significant experience with Armada, and has more recently developed a focus on the reference manifests and CI infrastructure in the Treasuremap project. Drew has shown the quality and quantity of code reviews that demonstrate the value that he'll add as an Airship core, and he has also shown eagerness and leadership in growing the Airship community as a whole. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paye600 at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 16:07:20 2019 From: paye600 at gmail.com (Roman Gorshunov) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 17:07:20 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed Message-ID: Hello team, I'm seeking for advices and assistance in resolving broken overrides in Divingbell. They do not work since Helm version update. More specifically, secrets with scripts for configuration changes get generated identical (as `default`). Details I have are collected in this Story: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2005095#comment-117207, including some help on how to reproduce the issue and test different versions. Thank you. Best regards, -- Roman Gorshunov From jimmy at openstack.org Wed Feb 27 16:40:46 2019 From: jimmy at openstack.org (Jimmy McArthur) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:40:46 -0600 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! Message-ID: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> Hi Everyone - A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your ideas through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget to put your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to speakersupport at openstack.org . Cheers, Jimmy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 ___________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jimmy at openstack.org Wed Feb 27 18:04:21 2019 From: jimmy at openstack.org (Jimmy McArthur) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 12:04:21 -0600 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! In-Reply-To: References: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> Message-ID: <5C76D125.2040404@openstack.org> Hi Erik, We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. That should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in and still allow the Forum Programming Committee enough time to manage the rest of the approval and publishing process in time for people's travel needs, etc... For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader with the proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For example, if something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to the Forum, just submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall or myself would be happy to help you add details a bit later in the process, should clarification be necessary. We typically have enough spots for the majority of proposed Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but food for thought. Cheers, Jimmy > Erik McCormick > February 27, 2019 at 11:31 AM > Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple weeks? I > expect there to be a few session proposals that will come out of the > Ops Meetup which ends the day before the deadline. It would be helpful > to have a little time to organize and submit things afterwards. > > Thanks, > Erik > > Jimmy McArthur > February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM > Hi Everyone - > > A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the > 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your > ideas through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget > to put your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. > > This is not a classic conference track with speakers and > presentations. OSF community members (participants in development > teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested > individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment > on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity > to help shape the development of future project releases. More > information about the Forum [1]. > > If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to > speakersupport at openstack.org . > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum > [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ > [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations > [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 > ___________________________________________ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jimmy at openstack.org Wed Feb 27 19:08:31 2019 From: jimmy at openstack.org (Jimmy McArthur) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 13:08:31 -0600 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! In-Reply-To: References: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> <5C76D125.2040404@openstack.org> Message-ID: <5C76E02F.4010906@openstack.org> Erik, I definitely understand the timeline is tight. One of the reasons that we publish the schedule so early is to enable community members to plan their schedule early, especially as there is more overlap with the main Summit Schedule in Denver. Additionally, travel approval is often predicated upon someone showing they're leading/moderating a session. Before publishing the schedule, we print a draft Forum schedule for community feedback and start promotion of the schedule, which we have to put up on the OpenStack website and apps at 5 weeks out. Extending the date beyond the 10th won't give the Forum Selection Committee enough time to complete those tasks. I think if the Ops team can come up with some high level discussion topics, we'll be happy to put some holds in the Forum schedule for Ops-specific content. diablo_rojo has also offered to attend some of the Ops sessions remotely as well, if that would help you all shape some things into actual sessions. I wish I could offer a further extension, but extending it another week would push too far into the process. Cheers, Jimmy > Erik McCormick > February 27, 2019 at 12:43 PM > Jimmy, > > I won't even get home until the 10th much less have time to follow up > with anyone. The formation of those sessions often come from > discussions spawned at the meetup and expanded upon later with folks > who could not attend. Could we at least get until 3/17? I understand > your desire to finalize the schedule, but 6 weeks out should be more > than enough time, no? > > Thanks, > Erik > Jimmy McArthur > February 27, 2019 at 12:04 PM > Hi Erik, > > We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. > That should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in and > still allow the Forum Programming Committee enough time to manage the > rest of the approval and publishing process in time for people's > travel needs, etc... > > For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader with > the proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For example, > if something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to the Forum, > just submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall or myself > would be happy to help you add details a bit later in the process, > should clarification be necessary. We typically have enough spots for > the majority of proposed Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but > food for thought. > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > > _______________________________________________ > Airship-discuss mailing list > Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org > http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss > Erik McCormick > February 27, 2019 at 11:31 AM > Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple weeks? I > expect there to be a few session proposals that will come out of the > Ops Meetup which ends the day before the deadline. It would be helpful > to have a little time to organize and submit things afterwards. > > Thanks, > Erik > > Jimmy McArthur > February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM > Hi Everyone - > > A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the > 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your > ideas through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget > to put your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. > > This is not a classic conference track with speakers and > presentations. OSF community members (participants in development > teams, operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested > individuals) discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment > on and we welcome your participation. The Forum is your opportunity > to help shape the development of future project releases. More > information about the Forum [1]. > > If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to > speakersupport at openstack.org . > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum > [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ > [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations > [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 > ___________________________________________ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 19:14:54 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:14:54 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! In-Reply-To: <5C76E02F.4010906@openstack.org> References: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> <5C76D125.2040404@openstack.org> <5C76E02F.4010906@openstack.org> Message-ID: Hello :) On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Jimmy McArthur wrote: > Erik, > > I definitely understand the timeline is tight. One of the reasons that we > publish the schedule so early is to enable community members to plan their > schedule early, especially as there is more overlap with the main Summit > Schedule in Denver. Additionally, travel approval is often predicated upon > someone showing they're leading/moderating a session. > > Before publishing the schedule, we print a draft Forum schedule for > community feedback and start promotion of the schedule, which we have to > put up on the OpenStack website and apps at 5 weeks out. Extending the date > beyond the 10th won't give the Forum Selection Committee enough time to > complete those tasks. > > I think if the Ops team can come up with some high level discussion > topics, we'll be happy to put some holds in the Forum schedule for > Ops-specific content. diablo_rojo has also offered to attend some of the > Ops sessions remotely as well, if that would help you all shape some things > into actual sessions. > I'm definitely happy to help as much as I can. If you'll have something set up that I can call into (zoom, webex, bluejeans, hangout, whatever), I definitely will. I could also read through etherpads you take notes in and help summarize things into forum proposals. Another thing to note is that whatever you/we submit, it doesn't have to be award winning :) Its totally possible to change session descriptions and edit who the speaker is later. Other random thought, I know Sean McGinnis has attended a lot of the Operators stuff in the past so maybe he could help narrow things down too? Not to sign him up for more work, but I know he's written a forum propsal or two in the past ;) > > I wish I could offer a further extension, but extending it another week > would push too far into the process. > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > Erik McCormick > February 27, 2019 at 12:43 PM > > Jimmy, > > I won't even get home until the 10th much less have time to follow up > with anyone. The formation of those sessions often come from > discussions spawned at the meetup and expanded upon later with folks > who could not attend. Could we at least get until 3/17? I understand > your desire to finalize the schedule, but 6 weeks out should be more > than enough time, no? > > Thanks, > Erik > > Jimmy McArthur > February 27, 2019 at 12:04 PM > > Hi Erik, > > We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. That > should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in and still allow > the Forum Programming Committee enough time to manage the rest of the > approval and publishing process in time for people's travel needs, etc... > > For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader with the > proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For example, if > something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to the Forum, just > submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall or myself would be happy > to help you add details a bit later in the process, should clarification be > necessary. We typically have enough spots for the majority of proposed > Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but food for thought. > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > > _______________________________________________ > Airship-discuss mailing list > Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org > http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss > > Erik McCormick > February 27, 2019 at 11:31 AM > Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple weeks? I expect > there to be a few session proposals that will come out of the Ops Meetup > which ends the day before the deadline. It would be helpful to have a > little time to organize and submit things afterwards. > > Thanks, > Erik > > Jimmy McArthur > February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM > Hi Everyone - > > A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the 2019 > Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your ideas through > the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget to put your > brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. > > This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. > OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, > working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics > they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. > The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future > project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. > > If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to > speakersupport at openstack.org. > > Cheers, > Jimmy > > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum > [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ > [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations > [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 > ___________________________________________ > > Hopefully that helps! -Kendall (diablo_rojo) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 19:19:54 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:19:54 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! In-Reply-To: References: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> <5C76D125.2040404@openstack.org> <5C76E02F.4010906@openstack.org> Message-ID: Another- nother thought: You could take a look at what is submitted by project teams closer to the deadline and see if your ideas might fit well with theirs since they are looking for feedback from operators anyway. In the past I have always hoped for more engagement in the forum sessions I've submitted but only ever had one or two operators able to join us. -Kendall (diablo_rojo) On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:14 AM Kendall Nelson wrote: > Hello :) > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Jimmy McArthur > wrote: > >> Erik, >> >> I definitely understand the timeline is tight. One of the reasons that >> we publish the schedule so early is to enable community members to plan >> their schedule early, especially as there is more overlap with the main >> Summit Schedule in Denver. Additionally, travel approval is often >> predicated upon someone showing they're leading/moderating a session. >> >> Before publishing the schedule, we print a draft Forum schedule for >> community feedback and start promotion of the schedule, which we have to >> put up on the OpenStack website and apps at 5 weeks out. Extending the date >> beyond the 10th won't give the Forum Selection Committee enough time to >> complete those tasks. >> >> I think if the Ops team can come up with some high level discussion >> topics, we'll be happy to put some holds in the Forum schedule for >> Ops-specific content. diablo_rojo has also offered to attend some of the >> Ops sessions remotely as well, if that would help you all shape some things >> into actual sessions. >> > > I'm definitely happy to help as much as I can. If you'll have something > set up that I can call into (zoom, webex, bluejeans, hangout, whatever), I > definitely will. I could also read through etherpads you take notes in and > help summarize things into forum proposals. > > Another thing to note is that whatever you/we submit, it doesn't have to > be award winning :) Its totally possible to change session descriptions and > edit who the speaker is later. > > Other random thought, I know Sean McGinnis has attended a lot of the > Operators stuff in the past so maybe he could help narrow things down too? > Not to sign him up for more work, but I know he's written a forum propsal > or two in the past ;) > > >> >> I wish I could offer a further extension, but extending it another week >> would push too far into the process. >> >> Cheers, >> Jimmy >> >> Erik McCormick >> February 27, 2019 at 12:43 PM >> >> Jimmy, >> >> I won't even get home until the 10th much less have time to follow up >> with anyone. The formation of those sessions often come from >> discussions spawned at the meetup and expanded upon later with folks >> who could not attend. Could we at least get until 3/17? I understand >> your desire to finalize the schedule, but 6 weeks out should be more >> than enough time, no? >> >> Thanks, >> Erik >> >> Jimmy McArthur >> February 27, 2019 at 12:04 PM >> >> Hi Erik, >> >> We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. That >> should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in and still allow >> the Forum Programming Committee enough time to manage the rest of the >> approval and publishing process in time for people's travel needs, etc... >> >> For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader with the >> proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For example, if >> something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to the Forum, just >> submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall or myself would be happy >> to help you add details a bit later in the process, should clarification be >> necessary. We typically have enough spots for the majority of proposed >> Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but food for thought. >> >> Cheers, >> Jimmy >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Airship-discuss mailing list >> Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org >> http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss >> >> Erik McCormick >> February 27, 2019 at 11:31 AM >> Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple weeks? I expect >> there to be a few session proposals that will come out of the Ops Meetup >> which ends the day before the deadline. It would be helpful to have a >> little time to organize and submit things afterwards. >> >> Thanks, >> Erik >> >> Jimmy McArthur >> February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM >> Hi Everyone - >> >> A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the 2019 >> Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your ideas through >> the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget to put your >> brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. >> >> This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. >> OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, >> working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics >> they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. >> The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future >> project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. >> >> If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to >> speakersupport at openstack.org. >> >> Cheers, >> Jimmy >> >> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum >> [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ >> [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations >> [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 >> ___________________________________________ >> >> > Hopefully that helps! > > -Kendall (diablo_rojo) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From se136c at att.com Wed Feb 27 16:44:33 2019 From: se136c at att.com (EAGAN, SEAN) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:44:33 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DD3@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555374A98@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Drew Walters (dwalt) to become an Airship core reviewer. Drew has significant experience with Armada, and has more recently developed a focus on the reference manifests and CI infrastructure in the Treasuremap project. Drew has shown the quality and quantity of code reviews that demonstrate the value that he'll add as an Airship core, and he has also shown eagerness and leadership in growing the Airship community as a whole. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From se136c at att.com Wed Feb 27 16:44:59 2019 From: se136c at att.com (EAGAN, SEAN) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:44:59 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555375AA8@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From am240k at att.com Wed Feb 27 21:44:09 2019 From: am240k at att.com (MEADOWS, ALAN) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 21:44:09 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core In-Reply-To: <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555375AA8@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <7C64A75C21BB8D43BD75BB18635E4D896D1F8DDF@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFF.ITServices.sbc.com> <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555375AA8@MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> Message-ID: <15C64B16127ACA46A5BD581D320C78816ACE6973@MISOUT7MSGUSRCE.ITServices.sbc.com> +1 From: EAGAN, SEAN Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:45 AM To: MCEUEN, MATT ; airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kennelson11 at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 21:57:42 2019 From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 13:57:42 -0800 Subject: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! In-Reply-To: References: <5C76BD8E.4070504@openstack.org> <5C76D125.2040404@openstack.org> <5C76E02F.4010906@openstack.org> Message-ID: Hello :) On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:26 PM Chris Morgan wrote: > I think the issue is that forum submissions building on what gets > discussed in Berlin can't be expected to be finalised whilst attendees to > the berlin meetup are still traveling. It's not that Erik can't pull these > things together, in fact he's an old hand at this, it's more that this > process isn't reasonable if there's so little time to collate what we learn > in Berlin and feed it forward to Denver. Frankly it sounds like because the > planning committee needs 5 weeks, Erik can have two days. Seem unfair. > Honestly, the decision process doesn't take much time, aside from organizing a time that all 10 people can meet across x timezones (a thing unto itself). Its the community feedback period, giving people enough time to secure travel approval from their management, loading the sessions into the actual schedule app, and other print deadlines that force us to have everything set this far out. I will definitely help the ops community in whatever way I can! Do you have remote attendance set up for the meetup? > Chris > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:29 PM Kendall Nelson > wrote: > >> Another- nother thought: You could take a look at what is submitted by >> project teams closer to the deadline and see if your ideas might fit well >> with theirs since they are looking for feedback from operators anyway. In >> the past I have always hoped for more engagement in the forum sessions I've >> submitted but only ever had one or two operators able to join us. >> >> -Kendall (diablo_rojo) >> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:14 AM Kendall Nelson >> wrote: >> >>> Hello :) >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Jimmy McArthur >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Erik, >>>> >>>> I definitely understand the timeline is tight. One of the reasons that >>>> we publish the schedule so early is to enable community members to plan >>>> their schedule early, especially as there is more overlap with the main >>>> Summit Schedule in Denver. Additionally, travel approval is often >>>> predicated upon someone showing they're leading/moderating a session. >>>> >>>> Before publishing the schedule, we print a draft Forum schedule for >>>> community feedback and start promotion of the schedule, which we have to >>>> put up on the OpenStack website and apps at 5 weeks out. Extending the date >>>> beyond the 10th won't give the Forum Selection Committee enough time to >>>> complete those tasks. >>>> >>>> I think if the Ops team can come up with some high level discussion >>>> topics, we'll be happy to put some holds in the Forum schedule for >>>> Ops-specific content. diablo_rojo has also offered to attend some of the >>>> Ops sessions remotely as well, if that would help you all shape some things >>>> into actual sessions. >>>> >>> >>> I'm definitely happy to help as much as I can. If you'll have something >>> set up that I can call into (zoom, webex, bluejeans, hangout, whatever), I >>> definitely will. I could also read through etherpads you take notes in and >>> help summarize things into forum proposals. >>> >>> Another thing to note is that whatever you/we submit, it doesn't have to >>> be award winning :) Its totally possible to change session descriptions and >>> edit who the speaker is later. >>> >>> Other random thought, I know Sean McGinnis has attended a lot of the >>> Operators stuff in the past so maybe he could help narrow things down too? >>> Not to sign him up for more work, but I know he's written a forum propsal >>> or two in the past ;) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I wish I could offer a further extension, but extending it another week >>>> would push too far into the process. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> Erik McCormick >>>> February 27, 2019 at 12:43 PM >>>> >>>> Jimmy, >>>> >>>> I won't even get home until the 10th much less have time to follow up >>>> with anyone. The formation of those sessions often come from >>>> discussions spawned at the meetup and expanded upon later with folks >>>> who could not attend. Could we at least get until 3/17? I understand >>>> your desire to finalize the schedule, but 6 weeks out should be more >>>> than enough time, no? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Erik >>>> >>>> Jimmy McArthur >>>> February 27, 2019 at 12:04 PM >>>> >>>> Hi Erik, >>>> >>>> We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. >>>> That should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in and still >>>> allow the Forum Programming Committee enough time to manage the rest of the >>>> approval and publishing process in time for people's travel needs, etc... >>>> >>>> For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader with >>>> the proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For example, if >>>> something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to the Forum, just >>>> submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall or myself would be happy >>>> to help you add details a bit later in the process, should clarification be >>>> necessary. We typically have enough spots for the majority of proposed >>>> Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but food for thought. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Airship-discuss mailing list >>>> Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org >>>> http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss >>>> >>>> Erik McCormick >>>> February 27, 2019 at 11:31 AM >>>> Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple weeks? I expect >>>> there to be a few session proposals that will come out of the Ops Meetup >>>> which ends the day before the deadline. It would be helpful to have a >>>> little time to organize and submit things afterwards. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Erik >>>> >>>> Jimmy McArthur >>>> February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM >>>> Hi Everyone - >>>> >>>> A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for the >>>> 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your ideas >>>> through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't forget to put >>>> your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. >>>> >>>> This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. >>>> OSF community members (participants in development teams, operators, >>>> working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) discuss the topics >>>> they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. >>>> The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of future >>>> project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. >>>> >>>> If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to >>>> speakersupport at openstack.org. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum >>>> [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ >>>> [3] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations >>>> [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 >>>> ___________________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>> Hopefully that helps! >>> >>> -Kendall (diablo_rojo) >>> >> > > -- > Chris Morgan > - Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sunil.sood at ericsson.com Wed Feb 27 23:32:32 2019 From: sunil.sood at ericsson.com (Sunil Sood) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 23:32:32 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core Message-ID: +1 Sunil Sood -----Original Message----- From: airship-discuss-request at lists.airshipit.org Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 3:58 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Airship-discuss Digest, Vol 9, Issue 14 Send Airship-discuss mailing list submissions to airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to airship-discuss-request at lists.airshipit.org You can reach the person managing the list at airship-discuss-owner at lists.airshipit.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Airship-discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core (EAGAN, SEAN) 2. Re: Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core (EAGAN, SEAN) 3. Re: Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core (MEADOWS, ALAN) 4. Re: [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! (Kendall Nelson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:44:33 +0000 From: "EAGAN, SEAN" To: "MCEUEN, MATT" , "airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org" Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core Message-ID: <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555374A98 at MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Drew Walters for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Drew Walters (dwalt) to become an Airship core reviewer. Drew has significant experience with Armada, and has more recently developed a focus on the reference manifests and CI infrastructure in the Treasuremap project. Drew has shown the quality and quantity of code reviews that demonstrate the value that he'll add as an Airship core, and he has also shown eagerness and leadership in growing the Airship community as a whole. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:44:59 +0000 From: "EAGAN, SEAN" To: "MCEUEN, MATT" , "airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org" Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core Message-ID: <5B9C5644A0B2414E90A7F40249CF6A9555375AA8 at MOSTLS1MSGUSRFA.ITServices.sbc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 21:44:09 +0000 From: "MEADOWS, ALAN" To: "EAGAN, SEAN" , "MCEUEN, MATT" , "airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org" Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core Message-ID: <15C64B16127ACA46A5BD581D320C78816ACE6973 at MISOUT7MSGUSRCE.ITServices.sbc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 From: EAGAN, SEAN Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:45 AM To: MCEUEN, MATT ; airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core +1 Sean Eagan From: MCEUEN, MATT Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:24 PM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Subject: [Airship-discuss] Nomating Evgeny Li for Airship Core Airship team, I'd like to nominate Evgeny Li (evgenyl) to become an Airship core reviewer. Evgeny has dug deep into Airship automation and CI in the Treasuremap and Airship-in-a-Bottle projects, with an eye toward improving our documentation and config overrides. Evgeny has also provided a large number of high quality code reviews, and has proven his value as a reviewer. In addition, he has demonstrated an eagerness to welcome folks into and grow the Airship community - he has previous experience ushering a project into the OpenStack community, and I welcome his help in applying what he's learned to making Airship successful. Following OpenStack norms, current Airship core reviewers have 7 days (till EOD 3/5) to respond to this email with a +1 or -1 vote. Please consider this my +1. Thanks, Matt McEuen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 13:57:42 -0800 From: Kendall Nelson To: Chris Morgan Cc: Jimmy McArthur , Erik McCormick , openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org, "kata-dev at lists.katacontainers.io" , "starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" , "airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org" , "zuul-discuss at lists.zuul-ci.org" Subject: Re: [Airship-discuss] [all] [forum] Forum Submissions are open! Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hello :) On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:26 PM Chris Morgan wrote: > I think the issue is that forum submissions building on what gets > discussed in Berlin can't be expected to be finalised whilst attendees > to the berlin meetup are still traveling. It's not that Erik can't > pull these things together, in fact he's an old hand at this, it's > more that this process isn't reasonable if there's so little time to > collate what we learn in Berlin and feed it forward to Denver. Frankly > it sounds like because the planning committee needs 5 weeks, Erik can have two days. Seem unfair. > Honestly, the decision process doesn't take much time, aside from organizing a time that all 10 people can meet across x timezones (a thing unto itself). Its the community feedback period, giving people enough time to secure travel approval from their management, loading the sessions into the actual schedule app, and other print deadlines that force us to have everything set this far out. I will definitely help the ops community in whatever way I can! Do you have remote attendance set up for the meetup? > Chris > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:29 PM Kendall Nelson > wrote: > >> Another- nother thought: You could take a look at what is submitted >> by project teams closer to the deadline and see if your ideas might >> fit well with theirs since they are looking for feedback from >> operators anyway. In the past I have always hoped for more engagement >> in the forum sessions I've submitted but only ever had one or two operators able to join us. >> >> -Kendall (diablo_rojo) >> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:14 AM Kendall Nelson >> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello :) >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Jimmy McArthur >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Erik, >>>> >>>> I definitely understand the timeline is tight. One of the reasons >>>> that we publish the schedule so early is to enable community >>>> members to plan their schedule early, especially as there is more >>>> overlap with the main Summit Schedule in Denver. Additionally, >>>> travel approval is often predicated upon someone showing they're leading/moderating a session. >>>> >>>> Before publishing the schedule, we print a draft Forum schedule >>>> for community feedback and start promotion of the schedule, which >>>> we have to put up on the OpenStack website and apps at 5 weeks out. >>>> Extending the date beyond the 10th won't give the Forum Selection >>>> Committee enough time to complete those tasks. >>>> >>>> I think if the Ops team can come up with some high level discussion >>>> topics, we'll be happy to put some holds in the Forum schedule for >>>> Ops-specific content. diablo_rojo has also offered to attend some >>>> of the Ops sessions remotely as well, if that would help you all >>>> shape some things into actual sessions. >>>> >>> >>> I'm definitely happy to help as much as I can. If you'll have >>> something set up that I can call into (zoom, webex, bluejeans, >>> hangout, whatever), I definitely will. I could also read through >>> etherpads you take notes in and help summarize things into forum proposals. >>> >>> Another thing to note is that whatever you/we submit, it doesn't >>> have to be award winning :) Its totally possible to change session >>> descriptions and edit who the speaker is later. >>> >>> Other random thought, I know Sean McGinnis has attended a lot of the >>> Operators stuff in the past so maybe he could help narrow things down too? >>> Not to sign him up for more work, but I know he's written a forum >>> propsal or two in the past ;) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I wish I could offer a further extension, but extending it another >>>> week would push too far into the process. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> Erik McCormick February 27, 2019 at >>>> 12:43 PM >>>> >>>> Jimmy, >>>> >>>> I won't even get home until the 10th much less have time to follow >>>> up with anyone. The formation of those sessions often come from >>>> discussions spawned at the meetup and expanded upon later with >>>> folks who could not attend. Could we at least get until 3/17? I >>>> understand your desire to finalize the schedule, but 6 weeks out >>>> should be more than enough time, no? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Erik >>>> >>>> Jimmy McArthur February 27, 2019 at 12:04 PM >>>> >>>> Hi Erik, >>>> >>>> We are able to extend the deadline to 11:59PM Pacific, March 10th. >>>> That should give the weekend to get any additional stragglers in >>>> and still allow the Forum Programming Committee enough time to >>>> manage the rest of the approval and publishing process in time for people's travel needs, etc... >>>> >>>> For the Ops Meetup specifically, I'd suggest going a bit broader >>>> with the proposals and offering to fill in the blanks later. For >>>> example, if something comes up and everyone agrees it should go to >>>> the Forum, just submit before the end of the Ops session. Kendall >>>> or myself would be happy to help you add details a bit later in the >>>> process, should clarification be necessary. We typically have >>>> enough spots for the majority of proposed Forum sessions. That's not a guarantee, but food for thought. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Airship-discuss mailing list >>>> Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org >>>> http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss >>>> >>>> Erik McCormick February 27, 2019 at >>>> 11:31 AM Would it be possible to push the deadline back a couple >>>> weeks? I expect there to be a few session proposals that will come >>>> out of the Ops Meetup which ends the day before the deadline. It >>>> would be helpful to have a little time to organize and submit >>>> things afterwards. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Erik >>>> >>>> Jimmy McArthur February 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM >>>> Hi Everyone - >>>> >>>> A quick reminder that we are accepting Forum [1] submissions for >>>> the >>>> 2019 Open Infrastructure Summit in Denver [2]. Please submit your >>>> ideas through the Summit CFP tool [3] through March 8th. Don't >>>> forget to put your brainstorming etherpad up on the Denver Forum page [4]. >>>> >>>> This is not a classic conference track with speakers and presentations. >>>> OSF community members (participants in development teams, >>>> operators, working groups, SIGs, and other interested individuals) >>>> discuss the topics they want to cover and get alignment on and we welcome your participation. >>>> The Forum is your opportunity to help shape the development of >>>> future project releases. More information about the Forum [1]. >>>> >>>> If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to >>>> speakersupport at openstack.org. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jimmy >>>> >>>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum >>>> [2] https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/ >>>> [3] >>>> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/call-for-presentations >>>> [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Forum/Denver2019 >>>> ___________________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>> Hopefully that helps! >>> >>> -Kendall (diablo_rojo) >>> >> > > -- > Chris Morgan > - Kendall Nelson (diablo_rojo) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Airship-discuss mailing list Airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org http://lists.airshipit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/airship-discuss ------------------------------ End of Airship-discuss Digest, Vol 9, Issue 14 ********************************************** From ca846m at att.com Thu Feb 28 05:37:26 2019 From: ca846m at att.com (ANDERSON, CRAIG) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 05:37:26 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My best guess would be a change in the Sprig library between the Helm versions. In particular, the deep merge responsible for recursively merging the dictionaries together. Merge is called here in the gotpl: https://github.com/openstack/openstack-helm-infra/blob/master/helm-toolkit/templates/utils/_daemonset_overrides.tpl#L52 Which calls this function defined here in Sprig library: https://github.com/Masterminds/sprig/blob/master/dict.go#L80 Which in turn leverages another third party library: https://github.com/imdario/mergo I see this commit where version of mergo was updated from 0.2.2 to 0.3.7, and added a new mergeOverwrite function to Sprig: https://github.com/Masterminds/sprig/commit/4c59c1250a68e7f7a7e48c54f68c38b5c4c26d20#diff-040def46b3be654b6673438b43faf644 My guess is that mergo library may have decided to move this override behavior into a new function (mergeOverwrite), and in the process broke backwards compatibility with the existing merge function. I would suggest trying to replace all `merge` with `mergeOverwrite` in `_daemonset_overrides.tpl` and see if this resolves the issue. Regards, -----Original Message----- From: Roman Gorshunov [mailto:paye600 at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:07 AM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Cc: ANDERSON, CRAIG Subject: Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed Hello team, I'm seeking for advices and assistance in resolving broken overrides in Divingbell. They do not work since Helm version update. More specifically, secrets with scripts for configuration changes get generated identical (as `default`). Details I have are collected in this Story: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__storyboard.openstack.org_-23-21_story_2005095-23comment-2D117207&d=DwIBaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=aimn2OylFgog_5_aS85wtQ&m=uvBY6fCNMxPzMQ76iaiDzyLXGWttwkHsjDJ5e8PrsgA&s=89z0icRegvgXUdqpYCs8sOXElI7dpnLzn6cxu3sCNfg&e=, including some help on how to reproduce the issue and test different versions. Thank you. Best regards, -- Roman Gorshunov From paye600 at gmail.com Thu Feb 28 10:51:41 2019 From: paye600 at gmail.com (Roman Gorshunov) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 11:51:41 +0100 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Craig, Thank you for your reply and support. I have tried to do a quick replace of `merge` to `mergeOverwrite`, and it didn't work. Linting fails on the following error: > [ERROR] templates/: parse error in "helm-toolkit/templates/utils/_daemonset_overrides.tpl": template: helm-toolkit/templates/utils/_daemonset_overrides.tpl:52: function "mergeOvewrite" not defined Best regards, -- Roman Gorshunov From ca846m at att.com Thu Feb 28 16:31:54 2019 From: ca846m at att.com (ANDERSON, CRAIG) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:31:54 +0000 Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ok, our version of Helm must not be new enough to contain the version of Sprig library which has that patchset, so I guess it must be a different issue. But I would still suspect something with `merge` or one of the other changes to dict.go between helm versions. -----Original Message----- From: Roman Gorshunov [mailto:paye600 at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:52 AM To: airship-discuss at lists.airshipit.org Cc: TANG, ROY ; ANDERSON, CRAIG Subject: Re: Divingbell overrides functionality regression - Assistance needed Hello Craig, Thank you for your reply and support. I have tried to do a quick replace of `merge` to `mergeOverwrite`, and it didn't work. Linting fails on the following error: > [ERROR] templates/: parse error in > "helm-toolkit/templates/utils/_daemonset_overrides.tpl": template: > helm-toolkit/templates/utils/_daemonset_overrides.tpl:52: function > "mergeOvewrite" not defined Best regards, -- Roman Gorshunov