us-west-2 f16 amis
by Dennis Gilmore
hey all,
ive uploaded to the new region us-west-2 the fedora 16 amis they are
now public and available for consumption.
i386: ami-e2f37ed2
x86_64: ami-88f37eb8
Enjoy
Dennis
12 years, 5 months
OpenStack status
by Mark McLoughlin
Hey,
It's been a while since I've done one of these, so I'll start with the
bigger items since the last report:
- OpenStack was approved as a Fedora 16 Feature and F-16 itself was
released
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OpenStack
- Diablo was released upstream and this was what was included in F-16
http://wiki.openstack.org/ReleaseNotes/Diablo
- A number of us attended the Essex Design Summit in Boston. A really
worthwhile event with lots of very productive discussions.
- At the design summit, it was agreed to start maintaining a stable
branch with important fixes backported from the development branch.
This is now up and running:
http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranch
- We held a Test Day with a nice set of test cases that can still be
used by anyone who wishes to test OpenStack in Fedora:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-10-20_OpenStack_Test_Day
Many thanks to everyone who turned up!
- Thanks to the awesome work of Miroslav Grepl and Bob Kukura, we got
SELinux policy for Nova in time for the Test Day:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/734346
- The "getting started" wiki page has been further extended and
includes instructions on using MySQL, adding a separate compute node
and fully cleaning up an OpenStack install:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Getting_started_with_OpenStack_Nova
- Worth noting is that folks have been successfully testing OpenStack
in a VM by adding "--libvirt_type=qemu" to nova.conf
- Pádraig Brady, David Busby and others have been making good
progress on getting OpenStack into (and working on) EPEL6
- Swift hasn't yet been updated in F-16 to the Diablo version, but
David Nalley has posted some test packages here:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2011-November/000937.html
- Keystone was packaged, reviewed and added to F-16 and EPEL6:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/735179
It should work fine with Diablo's Nova, Swift and Glance. However,
no-one was done any serious testing of it in Fedora yet or provided
test cases and/or howto instructions.
- An issue with python-greenlet on i686 which was causing Nova to
segfault has been fixed:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15311
- Support for Fedora's iSCSI tgtadm (as opposed to ietadm) was added
upstream and backported in Fedora:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/737046
Thanks to Dave Malcolm and Pádraig Brady for sorting this one!
- A nasty IPv6/dnsmasq issue was fixed:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/737015
- A RabbitMQ update broke things for a while, but a new version was
pushed:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/738067
- Nova switched to github/gerrit upstream, so no more bzr!
- Upstream are now developing against SQLAlchemy 0.7.2 (the version
in Fedora) which should mean we see less of the types of
compatibility issues we've seen in the past:
https://review.openstack.org/708
- Upstream's install_venv.py tool for developers now works correctly
on Fedora, which should make it easier to work on OpenStack
upstream using Fedora
- Discussions have started around how an OpenStack Foundation should
be governed. I did my best to argue that it should be governed by
representatives of the contributor base rather than appointed
representatives of the sponsoring companies:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2011-October/000032.html
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2011-October/000036.html
- Vish, the Nova maintainer, announced a big bunch of "subteams"
upstream. If you want to subscribe to 10 more mailing lists, here's
your chance :-)
https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg04839.html
- On the Orchestration sub-team, Fedora's Andrew Beekhof has proposed
the use of Pacemaker Policy Engine by Nova's scheduler:
http://www.mail-archive.com/nova-orchestration@lists.launchpad.net/msg000...
- Richard Jones suggested we use a "supermin" appliance in order to
provide Fedora images for use with OpenStack:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2011-October/000874.html
- Michal Fojtik added OpenStack support to Deltacloud:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-deltacloud-dev/201110....
Cheers,
Mark.
12 years, 5 months
Fedora Core 14 and high memory instances
by Dima Brodsky
Hey,
Quick question, is there any easy way to make FC14 recognize the high memory instances; i.e. more than 32 GB
ttyl
Dima
--
ddbrodsky(a)gmail.com
"The price of reliability is the pursuit of the utmost simplicity.
It is the price which the very rich find the most hard to pay"
(Sir Antony Hoare, 1980)
12 years, 5 months
Re: OpenStack maint team
by Mark McLoughlin
On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 17:08 +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Everyone on the To: list has commit permissions on some of the OpenStack
> packages. It's quite a big list! :-)
>
> As more people get involved with packaging OpenStack in Fedora/EPEL, I
> think we need to figure out how to co-ordinate ourselves better. I had
> hoped we could use the cloud SIG mailing list for this but, in practice,
> I think folks are reluctant to spam everyone on the list with the nitty
> gritty details of what they're working on.
>
> I'm always reluctant to start another mailing list, but I think it might
> be warranted here. What say you to openstack(a)lists.fp.org or even
> openstack-maint(a)lists.fp.org? Maybe #fedora-openstack on Freenode too?
Ok, consensus seems to be to stick with the cloud SIG mailing list.
Perhaps everyone can make a concious effort to keep the list more up to
date with what they're working on?
> On a related note, I've been quick to approve requests for commit
> permissions on these packages in order to encourage folks to get
> involved. However, quite a few folks have ever used these permissions so
> I'm starting to think we should get require folks to have an actual
> contribution ready to commit before approving these requests.
I think David's point about established packagers makes sense.
So, we'll say that it's fine to liberally grant commit to established
packagers, but we (I) should be a bit more cautious and only grant it to
new packagers when they have a contribution they want to push.
Cheers,
Mark.
12 years, 5 months
OpenStack maint team
by Mark McLoughlin
Hey,
Everyone on the To: list has commit permissions on some of the OpenStack
packages. It's quite a big list! :-)
As more people get involved with packaging OpenStack in Fedora/EPEL, I
think we need to figure out how to co-ordinate ourselves better. I had
hoped we could use the cloud SIG mailing list for this but, in practice,
I think folks are reluctant to spam everyone on the list with the nitty
gritty details of what they're working on.
I'm always reluctant to start another mailing list, but I think it might
be warranted here. What say you to openstack(a)lists.fp.org or even
openstack-maint(a)lists.fp.org? Maybe #fedora-openstack on Freenode too?
On a related note, I've been quick to approve requests for commit
permissions on these packages in order to encourage folks to get
involved. However, quite a few folks have ever used these permissions so
I'm starting to think we should get require folks to have an actual
contribution ready to commit before approving these requests.
Thoughts on either of those?
Thanks,
Mark.
12 years, 5 months
Cloud SIG meeting today
by Garrett Holmstrom
Hi, everyone!
Today's meeting is quickly approaching, so come join us in
#fedora-meeting at 1900 UTC (2 PM EST; 11 AM PST). Note the time
change for everyone who left daylight saving time last weekend.
-- gholms
12 years, 5 months
