Anne Gentle wrote:
The reference list lives in the governance git repository:
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/programs.yaml
A bit of metadata I'd like added to the programs.yaml file is which
release the project was in what status, integrated or
On 03/07/2014 01:53 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Steven Dake wrote:
I'm a bit confused as well as to how a incubated project would be
differentiated from a integrated project in one program. This may have
already been discussed by the TC. For example, Red Hat doesn't
officially support incubated
On 03/07/2014 07:28 AM, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
mailto:thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Steven Dake wrote:
I'm a bit confused as well as to how a incubated project would be
differentiated from a integrated project in
Steven Dake wrote:
I'm a bit confused as well as to how a incubated project would be
differentiated from a integrated project in one program. This may have
already been discussed by the TC. For example, Red Hat doesn't
officially support incubated projects, but we officially support (with
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Steven Dake wrote:
I'm a bit confused as well as to how a incubated project would be
differentiated from a integrated project in one program. This may have
already been discussed by the TC. For example, Red Hat
Steven Dake wrote:
My general take is workflow would fit in the Orchestration program, but
not be integrated into the heat repo specifically. It would be a
different repo, managed by the same orchestration program just as we
have heat-cfntools and other repositories. Figuring out how to
On 03/06/2014 03:15 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Steven Dake wrote:
My general take is workflow would fit in the Orchestration program, but
not be integrated into the heat repo specifically. It would be a
different repo, managed by the same orchestration program just as we
have heat-cfntools and
@lists.openstack.org
Date: 04/03/2014 23:20
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
On 04/03/14 00:04, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
It so happens that the OASIS's TOSCA technical committee are working as
we speak on a TOSCA Simple Profile that will hopefully make things
easier
: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
Hi all,
Completely agree with Zane. Collaboration with TOSCA TC is a way to
go as Murano is very close to TOSCA. Like Murano = 0.9 * TOSCA + UI
+ OpenStack services integration.
Let me share my thoughts on TOSCA as I read all TOSCA docs and I'm
also
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
Georgy Okrokvertskhov gokrokvertsk...@mirantis.com wrote on 05/03/2014
00:32:08:
From: Georgy Okrokvertskhov gokrokvertsk...@mirantis.com
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev
/03/2014 00:34
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
Hi Thomas, Zane,
Thank you for bringing TOSCA to the discussion. I think this is
important topic as it will help to find better alignment or even
future merge of Murano DSL and Heat templates. Murano DSL uses YAML
representation
00:34
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
Hi Thomas, Zane,
Thank you for bringing TOSCA to the discussion. I think this is
important topic as it will help to find better alignment or even
future merge of Murano DSL and Heat templates. Murano DSL uses YAML
representation
Hi,
Here is an etherpad page with current Murano status
http://etherpad.openstack.org/p/murano-incubation-status.
Thanks
Georgy
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov
gokrokvertsk...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi Zane,
Thank you very much for this question.
First of all let me
=52381wg_abbrev=tosca
Greetings,
Thomas
Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com wrote on 04/03/2014 03:33:01:
From: Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 04/03/2014 03:32
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
On 25/02/14 05:08, Thierry Carrez
On 04/03/14 00:04, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
First of all let me highlight that Murano DSL was much inspired by
TOSCA. We carefully read this standard before our movement to Murano
DSL. TOSCA standard has a lot f of very well designed concepts and ideas
which we reused in Murano. There is
Excerpt from Zane Bitter's message on 04/03/2014 23:16:21:
From: Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 04/03/2014 23:20
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
On 04/03/14 00:04, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
It so happens
Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: 04/03/2014 23:20
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Incubation Request: Murano
On 04/03/14 00:04, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
It so happens that the OASIS's TOSCA technical committee are working as
we speak on a TOSCA
Hi all,
Completely agree with Zane. Collaboration with TOSCA TC is a way to go as
Murano is very close to TOSCA. Like Murano = 0.9 * TOSCA + UI + OpenStack
services integration.
Let me share my thoughts on TOSCA as I read all TOSCA docs and I'm also the
author of initial Murano DSL design
On 25/02/14 05:08, Thierry Carrez wrote:
The second challenge is that we only started to explore the space of
workload lifecycle management, with what looks like slightly overlapping
solutions (Heat, Murano, Solum, and the openstack-compatible PaaS
options out there), and it might be difficult,
Hi Zane,
Thank you very much for this question.
First of all let me highlight that Murano DSL was much inspired by TOSCA.
We carefully read this standard before our movement to Murano DSL. TOSCA
standard has a lot f of very well designed concepts and ideas which we
reused in Murano. There is one
Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
[...]
As you can see this is complicated topic with a number of possible
solutions. What Murano team is seeking to achieve is to get feedback of
community and TC on the most appropriate way to structure the governance
model for the project.
And that should make
Mark Washenberger wrote:
Prior to this email, I was imagining that we would expand the Images
program to go beyond storing just block device images, and into more
structured items like whole Nova instance templates, Heat templates, and
Murano packages. In this scheme, Glance would know
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 11:24 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Mark Washenberger wrote:
Prior to this email, I was imagining that we would expand the Images
program to go beyond storing just block device images, and into more
structured items like whole Nova instance templates, Heat templates,
Hi Thierry,
Let me clarify the situation with existing programs and projects overlap.
First of all, I would like to separate questions about what program Murano
as a project can fit and about any overlap with existing projects in the
official programs.
We position Application Catalog as a
Hi Georgy,
Thanks for all your efforts putting this together.
In the incubation request, one of the proposals is to include Murano under
an expanded scope of the Images program, renaming it the Catalog program.
I've been extremely pleased with the help of you and your colleagues in
helping to
25 matches
Mail list logo
