On 05/08/2012 12:11 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only
On 05/09/2012 11:40 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 05/08/2012 12:11 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification
On 05/08/2012 12:11 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only
On 05/09/2012 11:35 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/09/2012 11:40 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 05/08/2012 12:11 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original
On 05/09/2012 11:35 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/09/2012 11:40 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 05/08/2012 12:11 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original
On 05/09/2012 11:46 AM, Ori Liel wrote:
why not having type in volume?,
because the different volumes would be entirely different entities not
resembling each other
it's still works for our api, as non relevant properties does not shown in
resource representation,
we using this
On 05/09/2012 11:58 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 05/09/2012 11:46 AM, Ori Liel wrote:
why not having type in volume?,
because the different volumes would be entirely different entities not
resembling each other
it's still works for our api, as non relevant properties does not shown in
On Tuesday 08 May 2012 10:45 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 11:52 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the
On 05/07/2012 08:13 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/ provided by the project,
and
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/ provided by the project,
and Gluster now is a part of the RHT.
I believe there needs to be an indication which service
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/ provided by the project,
and Gluster now is a part of the RHT.
I believe
On 05/07/2012 11:52 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
On 05/07/2012 07:06 PM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On Monday 07 May 2012 02:06 AM, Ayal Baron wrote:
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/ provided by the project,
and Gluster now is a part of the RHT.
On 05/06/2012 09:56 AM, Ori Liel wrote:
We are introducing Gluster functionality into ovirt-engine REST-API.
Gluster entities are
- Original Message -
i can't see any justification for the 'gluster' prefix,
as this is only additional /service/ provided by the project,
and Gluster now is a part of the RHT.
I believe there needs to be an indication which service this is about.
If we will support provisioning
14 matches
Mail list logo
