Hi Kevin,
2013/12/2 Fox, Kevin M kevin@pnnl.gov
Hi all,
I just want to run a crazy idea up the flag pole. TripleO has the concept
of an under and over cloud. In starting to experiment with Docker, I see a
pattern start to emerge.
* As a User, I may want to allocate a BareMetal node
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 09:32 -0500, Jay Dobies wrote:
On 12/11/2013 07:33 AM, Jiří Stránský wrote:
3) Keep tuskar-api and python-tuskarclient thin, make another library
sitting between Tuskar UI and all python-***clients. This new project
would contain the logic of using undercloud services
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 17:48 +0100, Jiří Stránský wrote:
snip
When you say python- clients, is there a distinction between the CLI and
a bindings library that invokes the server-side APIs? In other words,
the CLI is packaged as CLI+bindings and the UI as GUI+bindings?
python-tuskarclient =
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Doug Hellmann
doug.hellm...@dreamhost.com wrote:
That covers routes. What about the properties of the inputs and outputs?
I think the best way for me to describe it is that as the
On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 15:22 +0100, Hugh O. Brock wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:11:14PM +0100, Ladislav Smola wrote:
Agree with this.
Though I am an optimist, I believe that this time, we can avoid
calling multiple services in one request that depend on each other.
About the
On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 19:09 +0400, Eugene Nikanorov wrote:
Hi Jay,
Sure, that is understood. In fact such refactoring could be a big
change so I'd split it to two or more patches.
Hope this will not overlap with ongoing neutron API tests development.
Hehe, given the sheer number of new
Excerpts from Sylvain Bauza's message of 2013-12-14 06:23:48 -0800:
2013/12/9 Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com
Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2013-12-09 09:34:06 -0800:
I'm thinking more generic:
The cloud provider will provide one or more suballocating images. The
one Triple
On 12/13/2013 01:13 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Dmitry Mescheryakov's message of 2013-12-13 12:01:01 -0800:
Still, what about one more server process users will have to run? I see
unified agent as library which can be easily adopted by both exiting and
new OpenStack projects. The need
Hi Christopher,
Thanks again for your answering. :)
The issue I mentioned before, has already committed to Gerrit.
So if you have time, please see here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62163/
P.S. Is it a good idea if I ask the contributor to participate in reviewing?
Any help will be
On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 10:52 -0500, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 17:48 +0100, Jiří Stránský wrote:
snip
When you say python- clients, is there a distinction between the CLI
and
a bindings library that invokes the server-side APIs? In other words,
the CLI is
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 2:59:19 AM, Ronen Angluster wrote:
Hello all!
we're developing a new storage appliance and per one of our customers
would like
to build a cinder driver.
i kept digging into the documentation for the past 2 weeks and could not
find anything that described the code
Hi Ronan,
Best advice I would give is start with the base driver class (
cinder.volume.driver.py) and the reference LVM driver (cinder
.volume.drivers.lvm.py). Those will give you a template of the interfaces,
args needed and return values.
Also jump in IRC at #openstack-cinder and we can chat
On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 16:23 +, Justin Hammond wrote:
I am a developer who is currently having troubles keeping up with the
mailing list due to volume, and my inability to organize it in my client.
I am nearly forced to use Outlook 2011 for Mac and I have read and
attempted to implement
13 matches
Mail list logo
