>
>> Anyway, not enough to -1 it, but enough to at least say something.
>
>>
>
>
>
> .. but I do not want to get into the discussion about software testing
>
> here, not the place really.
>
>
>
> However, I do think it is very harmful to respond to FFE request with
>
> such blanket statements and generalizations, if only for the message it
>
> sends to the contributors (that we really care more about upholding our
>
> own myths as a community than users and features).
>
>
>
>
>
> I believe you brought this up as one of your justifications for the FFE.
> When I read your statement it does sound as though you want to put
> experimental code in at the final release. I am sure that is not what
> you had in mind, but I am also sure you can also understand Sean's point
> of view. His point is clear and pertinent to your request.
>
>
>
> As the person responsible for Nova in HP I will be interested to see how
> it operates in practice. I can assure you we will do extensive testing
> on it before it goes into the wild and we will not put it into practice
> if we are not happy.
>

That is awesome and we as a project are lucky to have that! I would not
want things put into practice that users can't use or see huge flaws with.

I can't help but read this as you being OK with the feature going ahead,
though :).


Actually, let's say I have no particular objection. Just thought Sean's point 
is worth noting.

Now, if this had been done as an extensible resource I could easily decouple 
deploying it from all the bug fixes that come through with the release. But 
that's another matter...

Paul
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to