Carl Baldwin wrote:
Armando's point #2 is a good one. I see that we should have raised
awareness of this more than we did. The bulk of the discussion and
the development work moved over to the oslo team and I focused energy
on other things. What I didn't realize was that the importance of
Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is
August 21
Hi Kyle,
I also agree with Mandeep's suggestion of putting a time frame on the lingering
-2 if the addressed concerns have been taken care of. In my experience also
Hi Armando:
If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it
I agree. The problem is that after the initial issue identified in the
initial -2 review has been fixed, and the patch updated, it (sometimes)
happens that we can not get the original reviewer to re-review that update
Armando's point #2 is a good one. I see that we should have raised
awareness of this more than we did. The bulk of the discussion and
the development work moved over to the oslo team and I focused energy
on other things. What I didn't realize was that the importance of
this work to Neutron did
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 4:53 AM
To: OpenStack List
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Spec exceptions are closed, FPF is
August 21
Hi
Carl Baldwin wrote:
Let me know if I can help resolve the concerns around rootwrap. I
think in this case, the return on investment could be high with a
relatively low investment.
I agree the daemon work around oslo.rootwrap is very promising, but this
is a bit sensitive so we can't rush it.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote:
and even less
possibly rootwrap [3] if the security implications can be worked out.
Can you please provide some input on those security implications that are
not worked out yet?
I'm really surprised to see such comments
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
wrote:
Carl Baldwin wrote:
Let me know if I can help resolve the concerns around rootwrap. I
think in this case, the return on investment could be high with a
relatively low investment.
I agree the daemon work around
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Yuriy Taraday yorik@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote:
and even less
possibly rootwrap [3] if the security implications can be worked out.
Can you please provide some input on those security
Hi Kyle:
As -2 is sticky, and as there exists a possibility that the original core
might not get time to get back to re-reviewing his, do you think that there
should be clearer guidelines on it's usage (to avoid what you identified as
dropping of the balls)?
Salvatore had a good guidance in a
Hi Kyle,
I also agree with Mandeep's suggestion of putting a time frame on the
lingering -2 if the addressed concerns have been taken care of. In my
experience also a sticky -2 detracts other reviewers from reviewing an
updated patch.
Either a time-frame or a possible override by PTL (move to
It is not my intention debating, pointing fingers and finding culprits,
these issues can be addressed in some other context.
I am gonna say three things:
1) If a core-reviewer puts a -2, there must be a good reason for it. If
other reviewers blindly move on as some people seem to imply here,
I wanted to send an email to let everyone know where we're at in the
Juno cycle. We're hitting our stride in Juno-3 development now, and we
have a lot of BPs targeted [1]. Due to this, I'm not going to approve
any more spec exceptions other than possibly flavors [2] and even less
possibly rootwrap
Also, can I recommend that to avoid last minute rush of all the code in
Juno-3 (and then clogging up the gate at that time), we work as a team to
re-review patches that have addressed all previously identified issues?
For example, the for the GBP plugin, the first series of patches have been
Kyle,
Let me know if I can help resolve the concerns around rootwrap. I
think in this case, the return on investment could be high with a
relatively low investment.
Carl
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote:
I wanted to send an email to let everyone know
15 matches
Mail list logo
