Hi Barbican team,
In order to be easy for reviewing some patch sets in Barbican, we propose that
it should have a hangout meeting on 10pm EDT - Monday 30 April. So i would like
to send an email to notify everyone that feel free to join with us by leaving
your email.
Cheers,
Nam?
Hello Paul,
I am Nam from Barbican team. I would like to notify a problem when using
fedora-27.
Currently, fedora-27 is using mariadb at 10.2.12. But there is a bug in this
version and it is the main reason for failure Barbican database upgrading [1],
the bug was fixed at 10.2.13 [2]. Would
Hi Ade,
The two options are good to me. I choose the second time.
Thanks,
Nam
> -Original Message-
> From: Ade Lee [mailto:a...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 10:18 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>
Hi all,
Barbican's team are considering whether the Certificate Orders and CAs should
be removed or not [1]. And we would like to hear information from other
projects. If you are using this feature for your project, please raise your
hand. We will discuss about this.
[1]
Hi Client,
> Don't do it? Evolve v1 as needed, bud I'd recommend keeping whatever users
> you currently have functional for as long as possible. Work with the API-WG
> to make sure what you're doing is driving toward an API that fits inside
> their best practices.
Thanks for your advice,
should leave the message objects stable for now, and add a version
field in the future when/if a scenario occurs that requires us to change these
message objects.
[1]
https://docs.openstack.org/developer/barbican/contribute/database_migration
s.html
--Dave (dave-mccowan)
On 2/28/17, 4:52 AM,
Hi everyone,
Recently, there are many emails to discuss a topic that "Why are projects
trying to avoid Barbican, still?" [0]. That is very an interesting topic. Now I
would like to make a new topic related to Rolling upgrade. I am trying to find
information about the strategy to support
Mike Bayer wrote:
> Well let me reiterate the idea, which is that:
>
> 1. we add features to oslo.db so that the use of a custom stored
> function is not a big deal
>
> 2. we add features to oslo.db that are based on using triggers, special
> constraints, or Gist indexes, so that the use of a
Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> That’s an interesting precedent. I understand that since we gate on
> postgresql and mysql only, the solution is good enough to pass in the gate.
> But are we ok fixing a bug just for those two backends, knowing that it’s
> left exposed for other backends? Could you
Hi everyone,
I am trying to fix a bug that created two subnets on *one* network with
overlap CIDR [1]. My solution is to focus on Database interaction [2].
I am encountering/facing a problem with Postgresql
(There is no problem with MySQL).
For Postgresql, I used a feature called GiST that I
...@vn.fujitsu.com <na...@vn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Two weeks ago, I received an information about changing affecting DB
> schema [1] from Henry Gessau just a day before the deadline. I was so
> surprised about this and could not change my plan for my patch sets.
> Do you know any plan for th
11 matches
Mail list logo
