On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 10:53:30AM -0700, John Dickinson wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Sep 2016, at 9:21, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>
> > I would like to announce my candidacy for a position on the Technical
> > Committee.
> >
>
>
> Sean,
>
> Are there some specific areas of complexity that you would like to
On 27 Sep 2016, at 9:21, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> I would like to announce my candidacy for a position on the Technical
> Committee.
>
> I work for Dell EMC with over a decade (quite a bit over, but I don't want to
> think about that) in storage and software development. I have been involved in
>
I noticed a good statement, marked it inline.
On 9/28/16 7:24 AM, John Davidge wrote:
> Hi Zane,
>
> Thanks for pointing this out! My interpretation of the StackForge
> Retirement page[1] was wrong on that point. I've updated the blog post to
> reflect that (without removing the original
Hi Zane,
Thanks for pointing this out! My interpretation of the StackForge
Retirement page[1] was wrong on that point. I've updated the blog post to
reflect that (without removing the original interpretation).
The discussion about renaming git repos is a bit of a red herring, because
what we're
On 09/27/2016 06:19 AM, John Davidge wrote:
>> Hmm, I disagree about that. I think that experience actually *has* shown
>> us that there is a single set of rules that can/should be applied to all
>> projects that wish to be called an OpenStack project.
>
> We may have to agree to disagree here.
I would like to announce my candidacy for a position on the Technical
Committee.
I work for Dell EMC with over a decade (quite a bit over, but I don't want to
think about that) in storage and software development. I have been involved in
OpenStack since the Icehouse cycle and have served as the
On 27/09/16 06:19, John Davidge wrote:
Having Stackforge as a separate Github organization and set of
>repositories was a maintenance nightmare due to the awkwardness of
>renaming projects when they "moved into OpenStack".
There's no reason that this would need a separate github structure, just
Thanks for the questions Jay, answers inline.
On 9/26/16, 8:39 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>Who decides what is integral to OpenStack and what merely "enhances" it,
>though? The TC? The DefCore group? The Board of Directors? One might say
>all three groups have a say in defining what "is OpenStack", no?
On 2016-09-26 15:39:23 -0400 (-0400), Jay Pipes wrote:
[...]
> >* Reinstate Stackforge as the primary incubator for new projects
>
> Having Stackforge as a separate Github organization and set of repositories
> was a maintenance nightmare due to the awkwardness of renaming projects when
> they
John, appreciate your candor and candidacy. Some questions inline for you...
On 09/26/2016 06:57 AM, John Davidge wrote:
Last year, the TC moved OpenStack away from the Integrated Release, and
into The Big Tent. This removed the separation between those projects
considered integral to
Hi everyone,
I'd like to submit my candidacy for the OpenStack Technical Committee. You
may know me as john-davidge on IRC.
I've been an active member of the OpenStack community since 2012 (Folsom).
I met many of you for the first time while presenting the Curvature Network
Visualization
11 matches
Mail list logo
