o then prioritize what needs to be implemented
then they do have a useful role to play.
Phil
From: Boris Pavlovic [mailto:bpavlo...@mirantis.com]
Sent: 28 August 2014 23:13
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process
On Aug 29, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Joe Gordon wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
>> mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
>>>clearly describe in the Wiki the process and work
opment Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On Aug 29, 2014 10:42 AM, "Dugger, Donald D"
mailto:donald.d.dug...@intel.com>> wrote:
>
> Well, I think that there is a sign of a broken (or at least bent) process and
> that's
;
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 10:43 AM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
>
> On 08/29/2014 12:25 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
>
Sorry folks, I just had a new daughter since Thursday so I'm on
PTO until Monday, so thanks to the people who discussed about the
blueprint I created and how we can avoid the problem raised by Don for Kilo.
Answers inline.
Le 29/08/2014 19:42, John Garbutt a écrit :
I think this is now more
efficient than long email
threads, with slow replies. But I certainly want to respect everyones
communication preferences.
John
> -Original Message-
> From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:35 AM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing
gger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
Ph: 303/443-3786
-Original Message-
From: John Garbutt [mailto:j...@johngarbutt.com]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:35 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] I
I think this is now more about code reviews, but this is important...
On 29 August 2014 10:30, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:07:33AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Joe Gordon wrote:
>> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
>> > mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.co
I think the point is that if there were discussions that lead to
uncertainty about the split, they should have resulted in a - 1/-2 on the
spec instead of letting it sit there.
On Aug 29, 2014 9:46 AM, "Jay Pipes" wrote:
> On 08/29/2014 12:25 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
>
>> On 28/08/14 17:02, Jay Pip
014 10:43 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On 08/29/2014 12:25 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 28/08/14 17:02, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
>> core
On 08/29/2014 12:25 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 28/08/14 17:02, Jay Pipes wrote:
I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their
priorities are.
I don't know enough about the Nova review situation to say i
On 28/08/14 17:02, Jay Pipes wrote:
I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their
priorities are.
I don't know enough about the Nova review situation to say if the
process is broken or not. But I can s
On 28 August 2014 21:58, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
>>> The overall "scheduler-lib" Blueprint is marked with a "high" priority
>>> at "http://status.openstack.org/release/";. Hopefully that would apply
>>> to sub
Going a bit further up the thread where we are still talking about
spec reviews and not code reviews...
On 28 August 2014 21:42, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
> I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem
> with the process.
We got two nova-core reviewer sponsors, to
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:07:33AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Joe Gordon wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
> > mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
> >> clearly describe in the Wiki the
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 04:27:59PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
> >mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
> >
> >I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
> >clea
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 03:44:25PM -0400, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
> >I’ll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there is a
> >problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler there is
> >a crucial BP that needs to be implemen
Joe Gordon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
> mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>
>> I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
>> clearly describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP
>> approval process and build in this p
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Chris Friesen
wrote:
> On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
>> mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
>> clearly descr
] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
> mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>
> I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
>
On 08/28/2014 04:01 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alan Kavanagh
mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
I share Donald's points here, I believe what would help is to
clearly describe in the Wiki the process and workflow for the BP
approval process and b
ginal Message-
>> From: Dugger, Donald D [mailto:donald.d.dug...@intel.com]
>> Sent: August-28-14 10:43 PM
>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
>>
>> I w
Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
>
> I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a
> problem with the process. You submit a BP and then you have no idea of
> what is happen
l.com]
Sent: August-28-14 10:43 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
I would contend that that right there is an indication that there's a problem
with the process. You submit a BP and then y
: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On 08/28/2014 03:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
> core team members may actually be a loud statement about where
ties are.
Best,
-jay
> I feel we need to change the process somehow.
>
> -- Don Dugger "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale Ph:
> 303/443-3786
>
> -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014
On 08/28/2014 03:02 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from
core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their
priorities are.
Or it could be that they haven't looked at it, aren't aware of it, or
haven't been paying attenti
in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale Ph:
303/443-3786
-Original Message- From: Jay Pipes
[mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 1:44 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]
[nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugge
On 08/28/2014 02:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong
that a BP with multiple positive reviews and
6
-Original Message-
From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 1:44 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken?
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
> I'll try and not whine abou
On 08/28/2014 04:05 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong
that a BP with multiple positive reviews and no negative reviews is
dropped because of
On 08/28/2014 01:44 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I understand that reviews are a burden and very hard but it seems wrong
that a BP with multiple positive reviews and no negative reviews is
dropped because of what looks like indifference.
I would posit
On 08/27/2014 09:04 PM, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
I’ll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there is a
problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler there is
a crucial BP that needs to be implemented (
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89893/ ) and, unfortunately,
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:04:57AM +, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
> > I'll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there
> > is a problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler
> > there is a crucial BP th
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:04:57AM +, Dugger, Donald D wrote:
> I'll try and not whine about my pet project but I do think there
> is a problem here. For the Gantt project to split out the scheduler
> there is a crucial BP that needs to be implemented (
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89893
35 matches
Mail list logo
