On 5/13/16 3:29 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 12/05/16 20:06 -0400, Nikhil Komawar wrote: >> The copy-from case is only in v1. >> >> >> For v2, I am having discussion with Doug, Morgan and Mike (TC) members >> as well as Chris (interop engineer with foundation) to ensure that we >> can actually support copy-from in v2 for end users. I will add you to >> the review and you can chime in. > > First time I hear about these discussions. Where is it happening. > What's the > thing under discussion at this point? >
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/270980/ > Flavio > >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> On 5/12/16 7:59 PM, Fox, Kevin M wrote: >>> Is there a copy-from-url method that's not deprecated yet? >>> >>> The app catalog is still pointing users at the command line in v1 >>> mode.... >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Kevin >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Matt Fischer [m...@mattfischer.com] >>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 12, 2016 4:43 PM >>> *To:* Flavio Percoco >>> *Cc:* openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org; >>> openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org >>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] [glance] glance-registry >>> deprecation: Request for feedback >>> >>> >>> On May 11, 2016 10:03 PM, "Flavio Percoco" <fla...@redhat.com >>> <mailto:fla...@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Greetings, >>> > >>> > The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance >>> Registry >>> > service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall >>> community >>> > before the team moves forward with anything. >>> > >>> > Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some >>> deployments >>> > use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, >>> others use it >>> > for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a >>> good time >>> > for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 >>> doesn't depend >>> > on it. >>> > >>> > So, here's the big question: >>> > >>> > Why do you think this service should be kept around? >>> >>> I've not seen any responses so far so wanted to just say we have no >>> use case for it. I assume this also explains the silence from the rest >>> of the ops. +1 to remove. >>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> -- >> >> Thanks, >> Nikhil >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Thanks, Nikhil __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev