On 14 June 2014 00:48, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Review guidelines for API patches
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.commailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh
: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Review guidelines for API patches
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.commailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still
mi...@stillhq.commailto:mi
to
protect against the impact of a system with admin creds putting a large load
onto the system.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Still [mailto:mi...@stillhq.com]
Sent: 12 June 2014 23:36
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Review guidelines for API
] [Nova] Review guidelines for API patches
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.commailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still
mi...@stillhq.commailto:mi
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann
mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com
mailto:mi...@stillhq.com
In light of the recent excitement around quota classes and the
floating ip pollster, I think we should have a conversation about the
review guidelines we'd like to see for API changes proposed against
nova. My initial proposal is:
- API changes should have an associated spec
- API changes
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
In light of the recent excitement around quota classes and the
floating ip pollster, I think we should have a conversation about the
review guidelines we'd like to see for API changes proposed against
nova. My initial
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com
mailto:mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
In light of the recent excitement around quota classes and the
floating ip pollster, I think we should have a conversation about the
On 6/12/2014 8:58 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com
mailto:mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
In light of the recent excitement around quota classes and the
floating ip pollster, I think we
+1 to Matt.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
On 6/12/2014 8:58 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com
mailto:mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
If one new feature relates to some API modifications, and its spec has
already involved the modifications' description, is it necessary to add one
more API spec here?
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:20 AM, wu jiang win...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to Matt.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Matt
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
On 6/12/2014 5:58 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com
mailto:mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
In light of the recent excitement around quota classes and
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:56 AM, wu jiang win...@gmail.com wrote:
If one new feature relates to some API modifications, and its spec has
already involved the modifications' description, is it necessary to add one
more API spec here?
If the new feature is already mentioned in a nova-spec
14 matches
Mail list logo
