On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:00 AM, John Trowbridge wrote:
>
>
>
> On 09/19/2016 01:21 PM, Steven Hardy wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > Firstly, thanks for this detailed feedback - it's very helpful to have
> > someone with a fresh perspective look at the day-1 experience for TripleO,
> > and while some
On 09/19/2016 01:21 PM, Steven Hardy wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Firstly, thanks for this detailed feedback - it's very helpful to have
> someone with a fresh perspective look at the day-1 experience for TripleO,
> and while some of what follows are "know issues", it's great to get some
> perspective
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Steven Hardy wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Firstly, thanks for this detailed feedback - it's very helpful to have
> someone with a fresh perspective look at the day-1 experience for TripleO,
> and while some of what follows are "know issues", it's great to get some
> per
Hi Alex,
Firstly, thanks for this detailed feedback - it's very helpful to have
someone with a fresh perspective look at the day-1 experience for TripleO,
and while some of what follows are "know issues", it's great to get some
perspective on them, as well as ideas re how we might improve things.
Hi all,
I've recently started looking at the various methods for deploying and
developing tripleo. What I would like to bring up is the current
combination of the tooling for managing the VM instances and the
actual deployment method to launch the undercloud/overcloud
installation. While running
