| *** dogweather has joined #openstack-swift | 00:00 | |
| *** dogweather has left #openstack-swift | 00:02 | |
| openstackgerrit | Carlos Cavanna proposed openstack/swift: Improving statistics sent to Graphite. https://review.openstack.org/202657 | 00:10 |
|---|---|---|
| *** theannegentle has quit IRC | 00:12 | |
| *** aix has quit IRC | 00:23 | |
| clayg | torgomatic: what do you think about patch 185679 | 00:24 |
| patchbot | clayg: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/185679/ | 00:24 |
| torgomatic | clayg: it's the best patch in the whole world | 00:24 |
| clayg | you tried to help and then acoles_away and me were like w/e - then I tried to help - and now it's in conflict | 00:24 |
| clayg | yeah but I think the diskfile refactor made it in - so that one should be good I think | 00:25 |
| torgomatic | yeah, I should rebase that one | 00:25 |
| clayg | oh there was just that crappy comment - i guess I can pick it back up | 00:25 |
| clayg | oh - yeah that's better :) | 00:25 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 00:26 | |
| clayg | up to you - it was all your good idea - I'm happy to shepered it in for you too | 00:26 |
| torgomatic | I'll try to get to it pretty soon | 00:27 |
| clayg | kthnxbai | 00:27 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 00:33 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 00:33 | |
| *** NM1 has joined #openstack-swift | 00:37 | |
| openstackgerrit | Clay Gerrard proposed openstack/swift: cleanup from reaper fixes https://review.openstack.org/208106 | 00:41 |
| *** hrou has quit IRC | 00:43 | |
| *** hrou has joined #openstack-swift | 00:43 | |
| *** haigang has joined #openstack-swift | 00:52 | |
| *** NM1 has quit IRC | 01:40 | |
| clayg | charz: you may be weekend already -> community cluster functests failed with weird error -> [swiftqa03] out: Could not open requirements file: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/swiftqa/swift-2.3.0-244-g8c2d6f6/requirements.txt' | 02:00 |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/python-swiftclient: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/89250 | 02:20 |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/swift: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/88736 | 02:21 |
| *** haigang has quit IRC | 02:39 | |
| *** proteusguy has joined #openstack-swift | 02:39 | |
| ccavanna_ | clayg: Hi Clay. Quick question about automated checks. I checked in some fixes and I noticed that "SwiftStack Cluster CI check" ran. I didn't see those runs before. | 02:45 |
| *** haigang has joined #openstack-swift | 02:56 | |
| *** hrou has quit IRC | 02:57 | |
| *** haigang has quit IRC | 03:14 | |
| *** haigang has joined #openstack-swift | 03:16 | |
| *** zul has quit IRC | 03:22 | |
| clayg | ccavanna_: I think those were disabled while charz was using those nodes for other stuff - so now they're coming back on and - well i think they're broke | 03:23 |
| clayg | charz: will fix them tho - he's a ninja | 03:24 |
| clayg | ya'll have a good weekend! | 03:24 |
| ccavanna_ | clayg: they look broken :-) | 03:25 |
| ccavanna_ | clayg: or my code is broken in a fantastic way :-p | 03:26 |
| *** jrichli_ has quit IRC | 03:26 | |
| ccavanna_ | clayg: on a serious note :-), it seems a setup issue. It's returning 401 Unauthorized when trying to establish a connection. | 03:29 |
| *** zul has joined #openstack-swift | 03:37 | |
| *** nadeem has joined #openstack-swift | 04:01 | |
| *** mfalatic has quit IRC | 04:11 | |
| notmyname | good evening | 04:23 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 04:35 | |
| *** ccavanna_ has quit IRC | 04:37 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 05:05 | |
| *** proteusguy has quit IRC | 05:10 | |
| *** changbl has joined #openstack-swift | 05:21 | |
| charz | ccavanna_ clayg: thanks for notice, I'm working on it. :-) | 05:24 |
| notmyname | charz: thanks | 05:28 |
| charz | notmyname: np, have a nice weekend! | 05:30 |
| *** nadeem has quit IRC | 05:30 | |
| *** zaitcev has quit IRC | 05:33 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 05:38 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 05:39 | |
| tamizh_geek | Hey clayg: About patch 204196, I'm not sure if I understand your comments fully. | 05:47 |
| patchbot | tamizh_geek: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/204196/ | 05:47 |
| tamizh_geek | clayg: available for a quick chat ? | 05:47 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: I'm looking, but don't expect clayg to be here. it's 11pm on friday night for him | 05:56 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 05:56 | |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: oh sorry! thanks for your help. | 05:56 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 05:58 | |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: so i think his concern is that we don't always pass a request when dealing with swob objects. and that will result in inconsistent results (ie people noticing that their error message they are seeing /doesn't/ do json) | 05:59 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: and the way to fix it is audit the entire codebase for that. and that would be...rather larger...than your current patch | 05:59 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: at least that's how I read it ;-) | 06:00 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: Firstly, there are no test failures for this. And also pardon my ignorance - If the swob response is not passed any request object, and if the swob itself is cooking up a request object - in this case it will return a non-JSON response. | 06:00 |
| tamizh_geek | which is not changing the default behaviour existing before this patch right? | 06:01 |
| notmyname | I haven't looked at the test coverage yet, so I can't comment there ;-) | 06:02 |
| notmyname | but yeah, defaulting to the current behavior is good | 06:02 |
| notmyname | but I think his thought is that we'll have app developers sending an Accept header and sometimes seeing it respected and sometimes not. that's the inconsistency | 06:03 |
| notmyname | until the request object is plumbed through in every call | 06:04 |
| tamizh_geek | Ok. I'll be glad to send another patch to bring in a consistent behaviour so that all over the code base, the swob.Response is always instantiated with a swob.Request object. | 06:05 |
| tamizh_geek | But, one thing I want to confirm is, is the fact that "swob.Response cooks up a request object if we don't send one" is correct? | 06:05 |
| tamizh_geek | AFAIK, that doesn't happen. We haven't noticed this before because, the error response don't really care about what came up in a request. So they are *mostly* instantiated without a request object and everything was fine. | 06:08 |
| tamizh_geek | So there are two ways to handle this. 1) Bring in consistency by making the Request object a mandatory argument to the Response class. 2) Inside the Response#_get_error_response_string check if the request is None: then default to sending text/html response. | 06:09 |
| tamizh_geek | any comments ? | 06:10 |
| notmyname | looking :-) | 06:11 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: Thanks :) Hope I'm not pestering you in a weird time! | 06:12 |
| notmyname | no, not pestering. I was working on refactoring some other code. I've been working on some community tracking via commits and reviews and the organically-grown codebase needs an overhaul to be able to give me the new data I want | 06:13 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: ah. swob does "cook up" a request | 06:15 |
| notmyname | in master's version of swob, look at line 1387 | 06:16 |
| notmyname | basically, when a response is called, the request is generated if it wasn't passed in to the __init__ | 06:16 |
| *** haigang has quit IRC | 06:16 | |
| tamizh_geek | hmmm., checking. | 06:17 |
| tamizh_geek | oh yeah! | 06:18 |
| tamizh_geek | so in that case, in real life scenarios, the request object will be recreated from the env. And the 'Accept' headers will still be respected. | 06:19 |
| tamizh_geek | Am i right? @notmyname | 06:19 |
| notmyname | yes, that sounds right, but I don't currently remember everywhere that env comes from when calling the swob object | 06:23 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: however, I think i've figured out the last part of what clayg said | 06:23 |
| notmyname | (it normally takes me a bit ;-) | 06:23 |
| tamizh_geek | hehe. | 06:23 |
| tamizh_geek | and what was it? | 06:24 |
| notmyname | the reason you had to add the blank request is because of the way the test is getting the content on line 1412 in your patch | 06:24 |
| notmyname | that test was "bypassing the swob machinery" by accessing some hidden attributes of the response object | 06:25 |
| notmyname | so the gist he linked shows how to do it without adding the blank request | 06:25 |
| notmyname | ie https://gist.github.com/clayg/1e8cbd0b90eb66eb3ae0#file-request-is-should-patch-L26 | 06:25 |
| notmyname | directly call the response with an empty env and a callable that does nothing. this makes swob create the request and carry on | 06:26 |
| tamizh_geek | ooh yeah. since the response is a callable, I just have to call it with a empty env. | 06:26 |
| tamizh_geek | right! | 06:26 |
| notmyname | at least, I think that's all that's happening. that's based on the assumption that not creating the blank request cause the test to fail in your patch (based on your comment. I haven't run it) | 06:27 |
| tamizh_geek | let me try it right away. | 06:28 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: the other thing to try is to send a DELETE to an object that doesn't exist and an accept header. try with and without your patch. that will tell you if "the env is set so it should just work" , as you supposed above, is actualy what happens | 06:32 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: ie the other part of the gist from clayg | 06:32 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: clayg is right. The old tests pass without a explicit request object when change the way how I elicit the response. | 06:32 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 06:32 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 06:32 | |
| notmyname | ok, that's good | 06:32 |
| tamizh_geek | hmm yeah, will check a DELETE request now. | 06:33 |
| notmyname | and so the question (for us devs) is if it works without modifying the object server to pass in the request or if the object server must be modified before the json will be returned | 06:34 |
| notmyname | and if it's the latter, that means that users will see inconsistent error message formats, even if when they send the accept header, until we audit the entire codebase for that | 06:35 |
| *** csmart has quit IRC | 06:36 | |
| *** csmart has joined #openstack-swift | 06:36 | |
| notmyname | clayg: it only took me 30 minutes to understand your 7-line comment! and you had code and everything! ;-) | 06:37 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: Got it now. Thanks for awesome explanation. Appreciate very much. | 06:37 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: what did you see with the 404 on delete? | 06:38 |
| tamizh_geek | Firing up my vm. | 06:38 |
| notmyname | heh, I should too ;-) | 06:38 |
| notmyname | hmm..seemed to work on my machine. I think | 06:41 |
| notmyname | ah, wait | 06:43 |
| notmyname | just a delete is the wrong test | 06:43 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: yes - https://gist.github.com/tamizhgeek/d509dbff10c9dbb52848 | 06:43 |
| notmyname | yeah, that's what I saw too, but it's the wrong code path | 06:44 |
| tamizh_geek | its working. | 06:44 |
| notmyname | hang on | 06:44 |
| tamizh_geek | should I just write a functional test and verify it ? | 06:44 |
| notmyname | ...that test still worked. one more thing to try | 06:46 |
| notmyname | ok that passed too | 06:47 |
| tamizh_geek | cool! | 06:47 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: are you looking at the object server code? | 06:47 |
| notmyname | the delete method? | 06:47 |
| tamizh_geek | yeah at it. | 06:48 |
| notmyname | line 835 is what clayg modified in his gist. because it doesn't pass the request in | 06:48 |
| notmyname | so to get that code path, we need a delete on a missing object with an x-delete-at header | 06:48 |
| notmyname | and that works on my machine | 06:48 |
| notmyname | so in order to really break it, I removed line 854 | 06:48 |
| notmyname | the request=request, on the call to whatever ends up as the response class | 06:49 |
| notmyname | and that still works, from what I can tell | 06:49 |
| tamizh_geek | hmmm ok ok. | 06:49 |
| notmyname | and I switch back to master, and I get html always | 06:50 |
| tamizh_geek | so is this a good to go? I can add this confusion scenario as a func test and resubmit the patch ? | 06:50 |
| notmyname | so, point being, I think you're right about the env being passed to the auto-created request and it works | 06:50 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: ? | 06:52 |
| notmyname | I would like to see the test_507() method cleaned up as clayg suggested in his gist. it will make the test better overall. let me look at the rest of the patch and I'll leave a review | 06:53 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: thanks. will do that. | 06:53 |
| notmyname | as to a functional test, it would be nice, of course, but I wouldn't hold this up for it. | 06:54 |
| notmyname | well, don't hold me to that yet. let me think on it while I look at what you already have ;-) | 06:55 |
| tamizh_geek | ok then. will clean up test_507 and submit a patch right away. The func test will add in the very next patch, quoting this conversation. | 06:56 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: sure :) | 06:56 |
| charz | notmyname: around? | 06:58 |
| notmyname | charz: yeah ;-) | 06:58 |
| charz | notmyname: Did you know why setup.py is required pbr and it not includes in requirement.txt? | 06:59 |
| charz | notmyname: just curious | 07:00 |
| notmyname | charz: because it's setup.py that is parsing requirements.txt with pbr. so it needs to be available before requirements.txt is even looked at, which is why it wasn't added there. by the time requirements.txt is looked at, by definition you already have pbr installed | 07:00 |
| notmyname | however, if it makes things easier to include pbr in requirements.txt, I'd certainly support adding it | 07:01 |
| openstackgerrit | Azhagu Selvan SP proposed openstack/swift: Respect 'Accept' header in error responses https://review.openstack.org/204196 | 07:03 |
| charz | notmyname: oh, that's make sense to use it to parse requirements.txt. | 07:03 |
| charz | In general, if I use `pip install swift` from pip repo, pbr is not required, is it correct? | 07:04 |
| notmyname | charz: in general I don't think that will work because swift isn't on pypi | 07:04 |
| notmyname | as far as I know | 07:04 |
| notmyname | charz: but in general, pbr should not be required if you install swift from packages | 07:05 |
| charz | notmyname: oh! that's what I meant. Thanks | 07:06 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: uploaded a new patch 204196 | 07:06 |
| patchbot | tamizh_geek: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/204196/ | 07:06 |
| tamizh_geek | thanks for your help! | 07:06 |
| notmyname | yup, just pulled it | 07:06 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: out of curiosity, what time zone are you in? and what brings you to swift? | 07:07 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: for some code archeology, here's why your patch isn't causing problems: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/19422/ | 07:13 |
| notmyname | clayg: ^ | 07:13 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: I'm running the last set of tests now | 07:17 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 07:20 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 07:26 | |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: I'm in IST. I am based out of Chennai, India. | 07:35 |
| notmyname | ah, great! | 07:35 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: Few months back, I came across the Openstack and swift while discussing something between friends. Checked this out, looked great. Always wanted to contribute to a open source project. | 07:36 |
| tamizh_geek | Swift looked very interesting. | 07:36 |
| tamizh_geek | So I'm here :) | 07:36 |
| notmyname | yay! | 07:37 |
| notmyname | I'm very happy you're here | 07:37 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: Thanks! | 07:37 |
| clayg | notmyname: oh of course - when it makes up a response it's doing it from the environ *actual* environ - duh | 07:38 |
| notmyname | tamizh_geek: so you got me to look into a functional test for this, and I've got one. but it's not passing yet | 07:38 |
| tamizh_geek | which is that? May be I can help ? | 07:39 |
| notmyname | I delete a missing object and send an accept header and still get html back | 07:40 |
| tamizh_geek | by missing object you mean a non-existent object right ? | 07:41 |
| notmyname | right | 07:41 |
| notmyname | https://gist.github.com/notmyname/6d4f936215edc2ad59b0 | 07:42 |
| tamizh_geek | looks like the response is json and the content-type is not. | 07:45 |
| notmyname | right | 07:46 |
| notmyname | ah, happens with curl too | 07:47 |
| notmyname | so theres an issue there | 07:47 |
| notmyname | the unit tests aren't checking that either | 07:48 |
| tamizh_geek | yeah right. My bad! will fix it upload a new patch. thanks for the excellent catch. | 07:50 |
| notmyname | clayg: are you staying up for much linger? | 07:51 |
| notmyname | longer | 07:51 |
| clayg | notmyname: idk, i'm watching rome on prime | 07:51 |
| clayg | ummm 411 is still text/plain too :\ | 07:51 |
| notmyname | clayg: heh, ok :-) | 07:51 |
| notmyname | If y'all do get it straightened out, i'll take another look tomorrow night. but I've got to be up in about 5.5 hours to go to rainier so I should probably get to bed ;-) | 07:52 |
| notmyname | clayg: or just watch rome, 'cause it's late ;-) | 07:53 |
| clayg | so check_object_creation returns text/plain | 07:56 |
| tamizh_geek | notmyname: actually unit tests pass. the test_507_json_response explicitly tests the resp.content_type and it passes. The curl to delete a non existent object returns the correct content-type header as well : https://gist.github.com/tamizhgeek/8932641245299cab9b1c | 08:11 |
| tamizh_geek | clayg: which is the 411 test you were mentioning? | 08:11 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 08:35 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 08:39 | |
| *** marzif has quit IRC | 08:40 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 09:40 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 09:45 | |
| tamizh_geek | clayg: Got it from the gerrit | 09:49 |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 09:53 | |
| tamizh_geek | weird enough I get 404 as the response for the same curl : https://gist.github.com/tamizhgeek/bb876c7267d668310faa | 09:54 |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 09:59 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 10:07 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 10:10 | |
| *** silor has joined #openstack-swift | 10:14 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 10:26 | |
| *** silor has quit IRC | 10:39 | |
| openstackgerrit | Nakagawa Masaaki proposed openstack/swift: SAIO on Ubuntu 14.04 can not pass unittest. https://review.openstack.org/207790 | 11:02 |
| *** sanchitmalhotra has joined #openstack-swift | 11:06 | |
| *** sanchitmalhotra has quit IRC | 11:18 | |
| janonymous | Does current eventlet will work on py3 , Is Eventlet required to be upgraded for py3 : eventlet 0.17.3 now fully supports Python 3 , or is there a plan to move to asyncio | 11:47 |
| *** SkyRocknRoll has joined #openstack-swift | 11:54 | |
| *** haigang has joined #openstack-swift | 11:57 | |
| *** haigang has quit IRC | 11:58 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 11:58 | |
| *** foobar__ has joined #openstack-swift | 12:51 | |
| foobar__ | Hi everybody. Is there anybody who can help me with tempurls in swift? | 12:52 |
| foobar__ | I have setup everything and it works fine. Now I need an additional query parameter at the end of my proxy pipeline. TempURL seems to remove these parameters. Is there any way to do this? Headers are not working, since I wan't to embedd the documents into a website and, depending on the query parameter render a specific pregenerated thumbnail... | 12:53 |
| *** haigang has joined #openstack-swift | 13:14 | |
| *** haomaiwang has quit IRC | 13:18 | |
| *** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-swift | 13:18 | |
| *** jrichli_ has joined #openstack-swift | 13:28 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 13:28 | |
| *** jrichli_ has quit IRC | 13:42 | |
| *** haomaiwang has quit IRC | 14:01 | |
| *** haomaiwang has joined #openstack-swift | 14:01 | |
| *** changbl has quit IRC | 14:07 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 14:12 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 14:16 | |
| *** kcaj has quit IRC | 14:21 | |
| *** kcaj has joined #openstack-swift | 14:26 | |
| *** hrou has joined #openstack-swift | 14:26 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 14:29 | |
| *** sanchitmalhotra has joined #openstack-swift | 14:36 | |
| *** haigang has quit IRC | 14:52 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 14:53 | |
| *** sanchitmalhotra has quit IRC | 14:53 | |
| *** hugokuo has quit IRC | 14:55 | |
| *** hugokuo has joined #openstack-swift | 14:58 | |
| *** ig0r__ has joined #openstack-swift | 15:15 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 15:18 | |
| *** xnox has quit IRC | 15:25 | |
| *** xnox has joined #openstack-swift | 15:27 | |
| *** hrou has quit IRC | 15:53 | |
| *** pcaruana has joined #openstack-swift | 15:56 | |
| *** foobar__ has quit IRC | 15:58 | |
| *** alejandrito_ has joined #openstack-swift | 16:12 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 16:50 | |
| *** jrichli has joined #openstack-swift | 17:19 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 17:29 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 17:48 | |
| *** mowly has joined #openstack-swift | 17:59 | |
| mowly | Hi all. I have got a question. I am trying since 6 hours without success. Maybe anybody can support me? I have a formpost setup but cannot read out the element within the multipart request. The object ist successfully stored in swift but I need to generate a thumbnail with this object. | 18:01 |
| mowly | When I call request.body_file I get a _CappedFileLikeObject | 18:01 |
| mowly | how do i create an image object from this? I saw there is a .read() function, but this do not work... Any tips maybe?? | 18:02 |
| mowly | when i upload the file via swift cli client everything works perfect. In this case is simply use the request.body to create the thumbnail | 18:07 |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 18:09 | |
| *** superflyy has joined #openstack-swift | 18:12 | |
| *** SkyRocknRoll has quit IRC | 18:17 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has joined #openstack-swift | 18:29 | |
| *** ig0r_ has joined #openstack-swift | 18:32 | |
| *** jrichli_ has joined #openstack-swift | 18:34 | |
| *** superflyy has quit IRC | 18:34 | |
| *** jrichli has quit IRC | 18:37 | |
| *** hrou has joined #openstack-swift | 18:41 | |
| *** ig0r_ has quit IRC | 18:42 | |
| *** DericHorn-HP has quit IRC | 18:50 | |
| openstackgerrit | Janie Richling proposed openstack/swift: Trivial Key Master for encryption https://review.openstack.org/193749 | 19:01 |
| *** mordred has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| *** ig0r__ has quit IRC | 19:21 | |
| *** mordred has joined #openstack-swift | 20:12 | |
| openstackgerrit | Janie Richling proposed openstack/swift: Cryptography module to be used by middleware https://review.openstack.org/193826 | 20:17 |
| *** mowly has quit IRC | 20:23 | |
| *** olletsocmit has joined #openstack-swift | 20:55 | |
| *** olletsocmit has left #openstack-swift | 20:57 | |
| *** kcaj has quit IRC | 21:12 | |
| *** kcaj has joined #openstack-swift | 21:15 | |
| *** alejandrito_ has quit IRC | 21:21 | |
| openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-swiftclient: Block comment PEP8 fix. https://review.openstack.org/205849 | 21:33 |
| openstackgerrit | Janie Richling proposed openstack/swift: Encrypter and Decrypter middleware - object body only https://review.openstack.org/194191 | 21:59 |
| *** jrichli_ has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** jrichli has joined #openstack-swift | 22:05 | |
| *** NM has joined #openstack-swift | 22:08 | |
| *** jrichli has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| openstackgerrit | OpenStack Proposal Bot proposed openstack/python-swiftclient: Updated from global requirements https://review.openstack.org/89250 | 23:44 |
| *** kcaj has quit IRC | 23:46 | |
| *** kcaj has joined #openstack-swift | 23:46 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!