On Oct 18, 2016 8:09 AM, "Adam Harwell" <flux.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If there's no objection to us using gunicorn without it being present in
g-r, then I don't know if I want to argue strongly for adding it -- the
only benefit I see to tracking g-r at all is that it lets us continue to
get free version tracking for our amphora dependencies as they are updated
in g-r without having to manually tweak them. Once we go away from using
g-r for our amphora-requirements, our project team has to track these
dependencies manually. Tweaking the requirements bot to look at
amphora-requirements.txt as Doug mentioned won't actually do much, since
the whole point here is that we're including things that aren't in g-r so
there's no source to update them from.
> So, does everyone at least agree that it's ok for us to *use* gunicorn
internally on our service-vm image? If so, I'm happy to move forward with
option #2 if it looks like that'll be the path of least resistance. As I
said, options 3 and 4 are not really good solutions to this particular
problem, so in my view we should do whichever is most likely to be accepted
of options 1 or 2.

I don't think any of us are qualified to tell you not to use it in that
image. I also see the benefit clearly for Octavia, I was hoping to
understand the benefits to others (other projects/teams, packagers, and

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to