Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Proposal: Architecture Working Group

Chris Dent wrote: On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, Doug Wiegley wrote: So, it sounds like you’ve just described the job of the TC. And they have so far refused to define OpenStack, leading to a series of derivative decisions that seem … inconsistent over time. Thanks for writing down what I was thinking.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Proposal: Architecture Working Group

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, Doug Wiegley wrote: So, it sounds like you’ve just described the job of the TC. And they have so far refused to define OpenStack, leading to a series of derivative decisions that seem … inconsistent over time. Thanks for writing down what I was thinking. I agree that

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Artur Svechnikov to the fuel-web-core team

Congratulations, Arthur! Well done! On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Aleksey Kasatkin wrote: > Well, the agreement is reached. I've added Artur to fuel-web-core group. > > Let's continue discussion on time management questions if it will become an > issue. > > Artur,

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Placement API WSGI code -- let's just use flask

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, Jay Pipes wrote: Flask seems to be the most widely used and known WSGI framework so for consistency's sake, I'm recommending we just use it and not rock this boat. There are more important things to get hung up on than this battle right now. That seems perfectly

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Nominate Artur Svechnikov to the fuel-web-core team

Well, the agreement is reached. I've added Artur to fuel-web-core group. Let's continue discussion on time management questions if it will become an issue. Artur, congratulations! Aleksey Kasatkin On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Evgeniy L wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > It

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Elevating context to remove subnets created by admin

On 20 June 2016 at 18:41, Carl Baldwin wrote: > Somehow, this thread hid from me for a couple of weeks. I just > reviewed something relevant to this here [1]. It proposes adding > tenant id to segment. But, it also enforces that tenant id is the > same as that of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Need helps to implement the full baremetals support

Hi Yuanying. On 21 June 2016 at 08:02, Yuanying OTSUKA wrote: > Hi, Spyros > > Thanks for testing it. > Maybe you see that there are some problems to support baremetal. > We should add functional test to our jenkins job > because this template will be broken easily if

[openstack-dev] [Kuryr][Magnum] - Kuryr nested containers and Magnum Integration

Hello all, I am writing this out to provide awareness and hopefully get some work started on the above topic. We have merged a spec about supporting nested containers and integration with Magnum some time ago [1] , Fawad (CCed) led this spec. We are now seeking for volunteers to start

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum] Need helps to implement the full baremetals support

Hi, Spyros Thanks for testing it. Maybe you see that there are some problems to support baremetal. We should add functional test to our jenkins job because this template will be broken easily if anyone adds some logic to our templates/codes. But following problems will block us. 1. How to get

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Excerpts from Edward Leafe's message of 2016-06-20 20:41:56 -0500: > On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > > Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's > > business. > > Actually, yeah, it is. > > If I write an app or a tool that

<    1   2