Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Kudos to Balaji for working so hard on this. I really appreciate his candid
feedback on both frameworks.
Indeed, that analysis is very much appreciated.
From the Technical Committee perspective, we put a high weight on a
factor that was not included in the report
On 19/03/14 12:31 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Kudos to Balaji for working so hard on this. I really appreciate his candid
feedback on both frameworks.
Indeed, that analysis is very much appreciated.
From the Technical Committee perspective, we put a high weight on a
Thierry Carrez wrote:
There was historically a lot of deviation, but as we add more projects
that deviation is becoming more costly.
I totally understand the benefits of reducing the variance between
projects, and to be sure, I am not suggesting we have 10 different
libraries to do X. However,
On Mar 19, 2014, at 10:18 AM, Kurt Griffiths kurt.griffi...@rackspace.com
wrote:
Thierry Carrez wrote:
There was historically a lot of deviation, but as we add more projects
that deviation is becoming more costly.
I totally understand the benefits of reducing the variance between
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Kudos to Balaji for working so hard on this. I really appreciate his
candid feedback on both frameworks.
Indeed, that analysis is very much appreciated.
From the Technical Committee
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/03/14 12:31 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Kudos to Balaji for working so hard on this. I really appreciate his
candid feedback on both frameworks.
Indeed, that analysis is very much
On 19/03/14 11:20 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
My only concern in this case - I'm not sure if this has been discussed
or written somewhere - is to define what the boundaries of that
divergence are. For instance,
On 03/19/2014 08:20 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
As I understand it, all of the integrated projects have looked at Pecan,
and are anticipating the transition. Most have no reason to create a new
API version, and therefore build a new API service to avoid introducing
incompatibilities by rebuilding
Only one project is using swob, and it is unlikely that will change.
That begs the question, *why* is that unlikely to change? Is it because
there are fundamental needs that are not met by Pecan? If I understand the
original charter for Oslo, it was to consolidate code already in use by
projects
On Wed, Mar 19 2014, Donald Stufft wrote:
I’m not sure that “number of dependencies” is a useful metric at all tbh. At
the
very least it’s not a very telling metric in the way it was presented in the
review.
[…]
+1000
Seriously, this in itself just discredits any value in this analysis
On Wed, Mar 19 2014, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
That begs the question, *why* is that unlikely to change?
Because that project is Swift.
--
Julien Danjou
// Free Software hacker
// http://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
On 03/19/2014 01:47 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
On 03/19/2014 08:20 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
As I understand it, all of the integrated projects have looked at Pecan,
and are anticipating the transition. Most have no reason to create a new
API version, and therefore build a new API service to avoid
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Doug Hellmann doug.hellm...@dreamhost.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Kurt Griffiths wrote:
Kudos to Balaji for working so hard on this. I really appreciate his
candid feedback on both frameworks.
On Mar 19, 2014, at 12:27 PM, Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19 2014, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
That begs the question, *why* is that unlikely to change?
Because that project is Swift.
If you look at the Swift code, you'll see that swob is not a replacement for
either
@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 at 11:55 AM
To: OpenStack Dev
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Marconi] Pecan Evaluation for Marconi
I work for Rackspace and Im fairly new to Openstack Ecosystem
15 matches
Mail list logo
