Indeed I think the ASF VM should be our first priority. I'm talking about a temporary solution until then, not an advertising drive. I recognise that this could be a slippery slope (regarding user perception), but I feel confident enough that the lack of slope (ie users) is more important at this point. Hopefully Gary's change to the ticket and comment will achieve some progress.
- Joe On 10 January 2013 15:12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/01/13 12:18, Nick Burch wrote: > >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Joachim Dreimann wrote: >> >>> We've been trying to get a demo instance of Bloodhound set up for some >>> time. Currently the effort is still stuck with ASF Infra [1]. >>> >> >> It might be worth engaging with infra on this. It's possible that by >> asking several different things in one ticket (vm, build infra etc), it has >> confused things. Hopefully someone from infra could advise on what's needed >> to get it all moving (potentially by splitting out the build queries) >> >> Nick >> > > It may well be that we have not pushed hard enough on the ticket but it is > the first ticket we have raised that did not generate some kind of response > relatively quickly. I've updated the ticket to remove the extra question, > leaving the details of what I think we want and a few details of how we > will subsequently use the resource. > > Any other advice would be good! > > I don't think Joe is suggesting that we stop trying to get the VM of > course. I still work on the assumption that we will get the VM eventually > or get given appropriate advice on infra provided alternatives. > > Cheers, > Gary > -- Joe Dreimann UX Designer | WANdisco <http://www.wandisco.com/> * * *Transform your software development department. Register for a free SVN HealthCheck <http://go.wandisco.com/HealthCheck-Sig.html> *
