Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On 17 May 2016 at 09:56, Thierry Carrez wrote: > John Garbutt wrote: >> >> [...] >> Agreed that with a shared language, the ML is more effective. >> [...] >> I think some IRC meeting work, in a standup like way, for those with a >> previously established shared context. > > > Actually shared conte

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

John Garbutt wrote: [...] Agreed that with a shared language, the ML is more effective. [...] I think some IRC meeting work, in a standup like way, for those with a previously established shared context. Actually shared context / shared understanding / common culture is a prerequisite for any

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On 5/16/16 4:26 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Sat, May 14 2016, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > >> I think people prefer to use ML a lot and I am not a great fan of the >> same. It is a multi-cast way of communication and it has assumptions >> around time, space, intent of the audience & intent to actual

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Thanks for your reply. No offense intended (on the earlier one). I really want us to make sure all of us are on the same page on this thread. On 5/16/16 11:32 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Nikhil Komawar > wrote: > > > First o

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > > First of all, are you serious? This is not the right email thread for > such issue complaints. This thread is about communication and not just > for Glance but for [tc] and [all]! > > Secondly, you have not mentioned _anything_ about the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

First of all, are you serious? This is not the right email thread for such issue complaints. This thread is about communication and not just for Glance but for [tc] and [all]! Secondly, you have not mentioned _anything_ about the upgrade numbers/releases. You may want to notice the *major* API u

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 16/05/16 00:23 -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: > >> Excerpts from Nikhil Komawar's message of 2016-05-14 17:42:16 -0400: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> >>> Lately I have been involved in discussions that have resulted in giving >>> a wrong idea to th

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On 16/05/16 00:23 -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Nikhil Komawar's message of 2016-05-14 17:42:16 -0400: Hi all, Lately I have been involved in discussions that have resulted in giving a wrong idea to the approach I take in operating the (Glance) team(s). While my approach is consisten

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Hi, tl;dr We need everyone agreeing and understanding the "why" behind what we are doing. A shared language/understanding of the context is an important part of that. Writing things down, and giving people links to that, really helps. On 15 May 2016 at 13:07, Chris Dent wrote: > The fundamental

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

On Sat, May 14 2016, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > I think people prefer to use ML a lot and I am not a great fan of the > same. It is a multi-cast way of communication and it has assumptions > around time, space, intent of the audience & intent to actually read > them. Same is for gerrit/etherpad. It'

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Excerpts from Nikhil Komawar's message of 2016-05-14 17:42:16 -0400: > Hi all, > > > Lately I have been involved in discussions that have resulted in giving > a wrong idea to the approach I take in operating the (Glance) team(s). > While my approach is consistency, coherency and agility in gettin

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Erno, TBH, you clearly haven't taken the time to understand what I meant to say here. Clearly, thus self-justifying my email about ML discussions. Hence, I do not want to spend too much time writing a response. There are a few things that struck, so comments inline. Also, I do not want to comment

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

I'm not sure why I'm spending one of these very rare sunny Sunday afternoons on this but perhaps it's just important enough. Thanks Nikhil and Chris for such a verbal start for the discussion. I will at least try to keep my part shorter. I will quote both of your e-mails by name from which one it

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Hey Nikhil, found this all very interesting. Given your next to last paragraph where you ask for a "judiciary" it sounds like there is more going on here than I'm aware of, so apologies if my comments are not entirely germane: I found some of your analysis very interesting and related to things I

[openstack-dev] [tc] [all] [glance] On operating a high throughput or otherwise team

Hi all, Lately I have been involved in discussions that have resulted in giving a wrong idea to the approach I take in operating the (Glance) team(s). While my approach is consistency, coherency and agility in getting things done (especially including the short, mid as well as long term plans), i