settingsLogin | Registersettings

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

0 votes

I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

16:10:44 K2 for existing drivers only? What about the new drivers coming in? K2 is going to be a challenge especially with Fibre Channel

16:10:46 thingee, deprecation or removal... I'll probably put the patches up for removal then convert them to deprecation 16:10:48 DuncanT_: So the expectation is that maintainers are reliably reportng CI results by K-2 ?

16:11:04 jungleboyj, For exisiting drivers, yes

16:11:10 Ok.

16:11:38 timcl, New drivers maybe target the end of the release? With a hard cutoff of L-2

16:11:44 Since I know not everyone attends this meeting unfortunately, I think DuncanT_ should also post this to the list. 16:12:09 thingee, Will do. I'll email maintainers directly where possible too

16:12:29 anyone opposed to this, besides there being more work for you? :)

16:12:30 DuncanT_: OK we'll digest that and see where we are in the FC side

16:12:53 timcl, Cool. Reach out to me if there are major issues, we can work on them.

16:13:14 Ok, I think that's me done for this topic. Thanks all

16:13:17 DuncanT_: thx

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC, I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we can put in place the CI for FC.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
asked Mar 20, 2015 in openstack-dev by ClaytonLuce,_Timothy (280 points)   1 2
retagged Jan 26, 2017 by admin

40 Responses

0 votes

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's unknown.
I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my announcements
about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp. What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 20, 2015 by Mike_Perez (13,120 points)   2 3 4
0 votes

Mike,

I request the same consideration being given to the Oracle driver team:

The tag for Kilo in Cinder has already happened, so it's too late to revert. We
may be able to revisit this in Kilo RC, but I want to see your CI reporting
reliably now to then to Cinder reviews.

We are going to try by hook or crook to scrounge/borrow equipment to put a quick and dirty CI together and get it reliably reporting.

Tim


From: Mike Perez thingee@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 2:55 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's unknown.
I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my announcements
about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp. What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 20, 2015 by ClaytonLuce,_Timothy (280 points)   1 2
0 votes

Ditto for Huawei.

While we are not reliably reporting, we are reporting and the necessary steps have already been taken (and more importantly, approved) to get this reliably working ASAP.

We respectfully request the same consideration for our cinder drivers.

--Rocky (as proxy for Liu Xinquo)

-----Original Message-----
From: ClaytonLuce, Timothy [mailto:Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 14:27
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

Mike,

I request the same consideration being given to the Oracle driver team:

The tag for Kilo in Cinder has already happened, so it's too late to revert. We
may be able to revisit this in Kilo RC, but I want to see your CI reporting
reliably now to then to Cinder reviews.

We are going to try by hook or crook to scrounge/borrow equipment to put a quick and dirty CI together and get it reliably reporting.

Tim


From: Mike Perez thingee@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 2:55 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's unknown.
I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my announcements
about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp. What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 20, 2015 by Rochelle_Grober (7,040 points)   1 3 3
0 votes

On 21:53 Fri 20 Mar , Rochelle Grober wrote:
Ditto for Huawei.

While we are not reliably reporting, we are reporting and the necessary
steps have already been taken (and more importantly, approved) to get this
reliably working ASAP.

We respectfully request the same consideration for our cinder drivers.

The most important piece of a CI meeting the requirements is that the test
pass with your storage solution configured in Cinder, and to only report
failures when a patch really does break your integration. Otherwise, there is
no point. So far, the times Huawei-ci has reported have been false failures [1].

[1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/q/reviewer:+huawei-ci+project:openstack/cinder,n,z

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 20, 2015 by Mike_Perez (13,120 points)   2 3 4
0 votes

Hi Mike,

I think what we are talking is huawei-volume-ci, not huawei-ci. It is huawei-volume-ci that is on behalf of huawei 18000 iSCSI and huawei 18000 FC driver.
Regarding to "only report failures when a patch really does break your integration", I think huawei-volume-ci probaly should be marked as "not stable", but not "not reported". And have a look at all the other CI's report, I think some of them are really not stable too.
I do not understand why huawei-volume-ci is marked as "not reported".

The server of "review.openstack.org" is located at the United States (U.S.) and there is really a network problem between our CI and the review server.
Till now we are really working hard for this and our CI will be moved to a more stable network soon.

Mike, will you please have a consider about this? Thanks very much!

Thanks and best regards,
Liu

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Mike Perez [mailto:thingee@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2015年3月21日 6:37
收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
抄送: Fanyaohong
主题: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 21:53 Fri 20 Mar , Rochelle Grober wrote:
Ditto for Huawei.

While we are not reliably reporting, we are reporting and the
necessary steps have already been taken (and more importantly,
approved) to get this reliably working ASAP.

We respectfully request the same consideration for our cinder drivers.

The most important piece of a CI meeting the requirements is that the test pass with your storage solution configured in Cinder, and to only report failures when a patch really does break your integration. Otherwise, there is no point. So far, the times Huawei-ci has reported have been false failures [1].

[1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/q/reviewer:+huawei-ci+project:openstack/cinder,n,z

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 21, 2015 by liuxinguo (1,620 points)   3 5
0 votes

Mike,

Did not see a response to this request. Please respond, we can discuss in the Cinder Core meeting this week.

-----Original Message-----
From: ClaytonLuce, Timothy [mailto:Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 5:27 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

Mike,

I request the same consideration being given to the Oracle driver team:

The tag for Kilo in Cinder has already happened, so it's too late to revert. We
may be able to revisit this in Kilo RC, but I want to see your CI reporting
reliably now to then to Cinder reviews.

We are going to try by hook or crook to scrounge/borrow equipment to put a quick and dirty CI together and get it reliably reporting.

Tim


From: Mike Perez thingee@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 2:55 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's unknown.
I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my announcements
about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp. What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 23, 2015 by ClaytonLuce,_Timothy (280 points)   1 2
0 votes

Timothy

You are very welcome to add it to the meeting agenda if you feel it should
be discussed - the agenda is open and managed on the wiki.

On 23 March 2015 at 15:15, ClaytonLuce, Timothy <
Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com> wrote:

Mike,

Did not see a response to this request. Please respond, we can discuss in
the Cinder Core meeting this week.

-----Original Message-----
From: ClaytonLuce, Timothy [mailto:Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 5:27 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of
NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

Mike,

I request the same consideration being given to the Oracle driver team:

The tag for Kilo in Cinder has already happened, so it's too late to
revert. We
may be able to revisit this in Kilo RC, but I want to see your CI
reporting
reliably now to then to Cinder reviews.

We are going to try by hook or crook to scrounge/borrow equipment to put a
quick and dirty CI together and get it reliably reporting.

Tim


From: Mike Perez thingee@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 2:55 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of
NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:

I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their
submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up
the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build
out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is
on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point
we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's
unknown.
I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my
announcements
about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with
updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and
E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of
drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate
an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in
place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp.
What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] -
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] -
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Duncan Thomas


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 23, 2015 by Duncan_Thomas (16,160 points)   1 3 6
0 votes

I request the same consideration for Huawei 18000 iSCSI driver and 18000 FC driver. May I also add it to the meeting agenda?

·         I promise Huawei Volume CI will become stable and reporting stably  before March 31. Our CI will be moved to a more better environment tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.

·         And we also have find out why some times the job will failed. It is because that Jenkins allow the job builds concurrently on the same node by default and this will cause the job building fails. We have changed this to not to build job concurrently on the same node.

So I request the same exemption or FFE for Huawei 18000 iSCSI driver and Huawei 18000 FC driver.

Thanks and best regards,

Liu

·        

新国刘
华为技术有限公司 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.

Phone:
Fax:
Mobile:
Email:
地址:深圳市龙岗区坂田华为基地 邮编:518129
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Bantian, Longgang District,Shenzhen 518129, P.R.China
http://www.huawei.com

本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息,仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组。禁
止任何其他人以任何形式使用(包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发)本邮件中
的信息。如果您错收了本邮件,请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件!
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which
is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the
information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial
disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by
phone or email immediately and delete it!

发件人: Duncan Thomas [mailto:duncan.thomas@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2015年3月23日 21:28
收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
主题: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

Timothy

You are very welcome to add it to the meeting agenda if you feel it should be discussed - the agenda is open and managed on the wiki.

On 23 March 2015 at 15:15, ClaytonLuce, Timothy Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com wrote:

Mike,

Did not see a response to this request.  Please respond, we can discuss in the Cinder Core meeting this week.

-----Original Message-----
From: ClaytonLuce, Timothy [mailto:Timothy.ClaytonLuce@netapp.com]

Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 5:27 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

Mike,

I request the same consideration being given to the Oracle driver team:

The tag for Kilo in Cinder has already happened, so it's too late to revert. We
may be able to revisit this in Kilo RC, but I want to see your CI reporting
reliably now to then to Cinder reviews.

We are going to try by hook or crook to scrounge/borrow equipment to put a quick and dirty CI together and get it reliably reporting.

Tim


From: Mike Perez thingee@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 2:55 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 12:33 Fri 20 Mar     , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
I'd like to point out that for NetApp FC drivers NetApp has been in
discussions and updating progress on these drivers since their submission.

I will point out a discussion in the Nov Core meeting where I brought up the
challenge around FC environments and the response I received:

NetApp has in good faith been working toward implementing a CI for FC,
I won't go into the challenges of spending $$ for lab equipment to build out
a scalable quality CI system but suffice it to say the lab equipment is on
order and scheduled for arrival the first part of April, at which point we
can put in place the CI for FC.

1) We've been talking about CI's since Feburary 2014. That's really too bad
   this took so long. The deadline itself has been overly announced on the
   mailing list and Cinder IRC meetings. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

2) We have a number of FC drivers today that had no problem meeting this
   deadline that was expressed in November 2014.

3) I've barely received updates from Netapp folks on progress here. I'm the
   only point of contact, so if you weren't talking to me, then it's unknown.
   I've expressed this to a number of your engineers and in my announcements
   about the CI deadline [8]

I had to engage with Netapp to get updates, no one came to me with updates. The
last update I heard from one of your engineers was, we bought the hardware,
but it's just sitting there. That is not acceptable with us being past the
deadline, and shows a clear sign of this not being a priority.

NetApp has been very forthcoming in our progress and have gotten all our
other CI systems in place for 7-mode iSCSI/NFS, cDOT iSCSI/NFS and E-Series.

I respectfully request that NetApp FC be removed from this list of drivers to
be removed for Kilo and placed back in the releaes and we can negotiate an
agreed upon time as to when the CI system for these drivers will be in place.

There will be no negotiating on what is an acceptable timeline for Netapp. What
we all agreed to as a community back at the summit and Cinder IRC meeting
was it.

[1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
[2] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-01-21-16.00.log.html
[3] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-04-16.04.log.html
[4] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-18-16.00.log.html
[5] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-25-16.00.log.html
[6] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-04-16.00.log.html
[7] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-03-18-16.00.log.html
[8] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/054614.html

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--

Duncan Thomas


responded Mar 23, 2015 by liuxinguo (1,620 points)   3 5
0 votes

On 13:15 Mon 23 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
Mike,

Did not see a response to this request. Please respond, we can discuss in the Cinder Core meeting this week.

Which request? I already responded to your message:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059518.html

I responded to Huawei here:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059561.html

I've already responded to folks about extension:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059508.html

You either are reporting and show a history of being STABLE from now to RC or
your driver will not be readded. No discussion necessary. I will be removing
the agenda items for discussion on extensions. Three agenda items being added
to purely discuss the failures of companies actually making OpenStack
a priority for over a year is very inconsiderate of the communities time.

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 23, 2015 by Mike_Perez (13,120 points)   2 3 4
0 votes

I disagree with your assertion that NetApp has ignored this for a year and we are being inconsiderate of the community. The specific drivers (FC) we are discussing were added in the Kilo-1 period, so since Dec. and are net new drivers. All other NetApp drivers have had corresponding CI in place and operational.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Perez [mailto:thingee@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 1:03 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI)

On 13:15 Mon 23 Mar , ClaytonLuce, Timothy wrote:
Mike,

Did not see a response to this request. Please respond, we can discuss in the Cinder Core meeting this week.

Which request? I already responded to your message:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059518.html

I responded to Huawei here:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059561.html

I've already responded to folks about extension:

http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/059508.html

You either are reporting and show a history of being STABLE from now to RC or your driver will not be readded. No discussion necessary. I will be removing the agenda items for discussion on extensions. Three agenda items being added to purely discuss the failures of companies actually making OpenStack a priority for over a year is very inconsiderate of the communities time.

--
Mike Perez


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 23, 2015 by ClaytonLuce,_Timothy (280 points)   1 2
...