> On Sep 13, 2016, at 23:02, SivaRamaPrasad Ravipati wrote:
>
> Hi Chris ,
>
> Thank you very much. I got a very good information.
>
> Sorry. I didn't understand one thing Clearly.
>
> For the Question,
>
> At a time, can I deploy two storages arrays to same cinder
In one case yesterday, with a full openstack-on-lxd deployed and in use, I
quickly hit the too-many-open-files issue.
I raised fs.inotify.max_user_instances on the host to 50 which
unblocked me for a while. I ended up raising both to 99 and have had
smooth sailing since. Currently, the
In case you missed it, Github rolled out a new review process. It
basically works just like reviewboard does, where you start a review, batch
up comments, then post the review as a whole, so you don't just write a
bunch of disconnected comments (and get one email per review, not per
comment).
/me is always +1 on reducing the number of things we have to maintain and
keeping things simpler.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:04 PM Nate Finch wrote:
> In case you missed it, Github rolled out a new review process. It
> basically works just like reviewboard does, where
Also +1 for that source not being review board
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Reed O'Brien
wrote:
> Also +1 for a single source of truth.
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Rick Harding
> wrote:
>
>> /me is always +1 on reducing the
As long as we can have draft reviews like on RB and not
email-spam-per-comment, totally +1
On 09/14/2016 01:25 PM, Horacio Duran wrote:
> Also +1 for that source not being review board
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Reed O'Brien
I'm halfway through my first Github review (different project though) on
the new system, and so far I'm loving it. Also consider the issues we've
had with rbt being unable to handle diffs with files
added/removed/relocated. +1 from me!
-Casey
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Reed O'Brien
I'm +1 if we can remove the extra tools and we don't get email per comment.
On 15/09/16 08:03, Nate Finch wrote:
In case you missed it, Github rolled out a new review process. It
basically works just like reviewboard does, where you start a review,
batch up comments, then post the review as a
Hi folks,
Just a heads up, where will be some changes to authentication in the Azure
provider. When https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/6247 lands (if you're
working off master), or otherwise when rc1 is out, you will need to remove
"tenant-id" from your credentials.yaml.
There is more work
One thing review board does better is use gutter indicators so as not to
interrupt the flow of reading the code with huge comment blocks. It also seems
much better at allowing previous commits with comments to be viewed in their
entirety. And it allows the reviewer to differentiate between issues
For those who have been following the lxd issue that we've been digressing on
at the charmer summit, see https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1602192
7/22-now no activity
It looks like the bug already has eyes on it, but has been idle for a while
now. It would be nice to get this thing
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM Andrew Wilkins
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Just a heads up, where will be some changes to authentication in the Azure
> provider. When https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/6247 lands (if you're
> working off master), or otherwise when rc1 is
I think that the issue is that someone has to maintain the RB and the
cost/time spent on that does not seem commensurate with the bonus features
in my experience.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:13 PM Ian Booth wrote:
> One thing review board does better is use gutter
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:22 AM Rick Harding
wrote:
> I think that the issue is that someone has to maintain the RB and the
> cost/time spent on that does not seem commensurate with the bonus features
> in my experience.
>
Agreed and +1. I propose we all try it for a
+1 on moving away from RB \o/
Currently contributors need to allow RB to run against their github
fork, if they don't then we do not see their contributions on RB and PRs
go un-reviewed and seem ignored.
Communication between github and RB is not optimal: we had plenty of
instances where RB
15 matches
Mail list logo