Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] Deep dive Thursday May 4th 1400 UTC on deployed-server

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:58 PM, James Slagle wrote: > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 8:34 AM, James Slagle > wrote: > > I saw there was no deep dive scheduled for tomorrow, so I decided I'd > > go ahead and plan one. > > > > It will be recorded if you

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] pingtest vs tempest

On Thursday, 4 May 2017 20:11:14 CEST Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Dan Prince wrote: > > I like the idea of getting pingtest out of tripleo.sh as more of a > > stand alone tool. I would support an effort that re-implemented it... > > and using

Re: [openstack-dev] [charms] Onboarding session at next weeks summit

I'm looking forward to it! On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:57 PM Andrew Mcleod wrote: > I'll be there too! :) > > > Andrew > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Alex Kavanagh > wrote: > >> I will be there too. Looking forward to catching up

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [stable] ironic-stable-maint update proposal

With no objections recorded, I think we can make this change. Tony or someone with required ACL, could you please do it? On 04/27/2017 04:21 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: Hi all! I'd like to propose the following changes to the ironic-stable-maint group [0]: 1. Add Ruby Loo (rloo) to the group.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >> On Wed, 3 May 2017, Drew Fisher wrote: >> >>> This email is meant to be the ML discussion of a question I brought up >>> during the TC meeting on April 25th.; [1] >> >> >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05.05.2017 2:09, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 04/05/17 10:14, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> We started with no stable branches, we were just producing releases and >> ensuring that updates vaguely worked from N-1 to N. There were a lot of >> distributions, and they all maintained their own stable

[openstack-dev] [networking-ovn] metadata agent implementation

Hi folks, Now that it looks like the metadata proposal is more refined [0], I'd like to get some feedback from you on the driver implementation. The ovn-metadata-agent in networking-ovn will be responsible for creating the namespaces, spawning haproxies and so on. But also, it must implement

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 07:16 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: > On 05.05.2017 2:09, Zane Bitter wrote: >> On 04/05/17 10:14, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> We started with no stable branches, we were just producing releases and >>> ensuring that updates vaguely worked from N-1 to N. There were a lot of >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] stepping down from core

Rossella, It is pleasure to know you and your contribution for Neutron is remarkable :) I wish you all the best! On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:28 AM Edgar Magana wrote: > Que??? Estás bien? > Me ha sorprendido tu email. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On May 4, 2017, at 6:55

[openstack-dev] [release] Release countdown for week R-16 and R-15, May 8-19

Welcome to our regular release countdown email! Development Focus - Teams should be focused on Pike feature development and completion of release goals. Team members attending the Forum at the Boston Summit should be focused in requirements gathering and collecting feedback from

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Should the Technical Committee meetings be dropped?

On Thu, May 04 2017, Flavio Percoco wrote: > Sending this out to kick off a broader discussion on these topics. Thoughts? > Opinions? Objections? IRC meetings are a barrier of entry for many people because it makes it complicated to contribute as you described (and as I did a while back¹). So

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Should the Technical Committee meetings be dropped?

Sean McGinnis wrote: > [...] > But part of my concern to getting rid of the meeting is that I do find it > valuable. The arguments against having it are some of the same I've heard for > our in-person events. It's hard for some to travel to the PTG. There's a lot > of active discussion at the PTG

[openstack-dev] [daisycloud-core] Meeting minutes for IRC meeting 0800UTC May 5 2017

Meeting ended Fri May 5 08:58:39 2017 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/daisycloud/2017/daisycloud.2017-05-05-07.59.html Minutes (text):

Re: [openstack-dev] contribute to the travel assistance program

That link again https://www.eventbrite.com/e/openstack-summit-may-2017-boston-tickets-283756 75409 Sorry for the duplication. -- Amrith Kumar amrith.ku...@gmail.com > -Original Message- > From: Amrith Kumar [mailto:amrith.ku...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 11:56 AM > To:

[openstack-dev] [all][ptl][goals] Community goals for Queen

Hello everyone, May 11th at 11:00-12:30 at the forum we will be discussing our community wide goals for the Queen release [1]! We do OpenStack-wide goals to "achieve visible common changes, push for basic levels of consistency and user experience, and efficiently improve certain areas where

[openstack-dev] [nova] placement/resource providers update 22

Placement and resource providers update 21. Please let me know if anything is incorrect or missing. If you're going to be in Boston there are some placement related sessions that may be worth your while: * Scheduler Wars: A New Hope

[openstack-dev] contribute to the travel assistance program

Folks, Summit is just a couple of days away and it is still not too late to participate in the foundation's travel assistance program. Every bit counts, and if you are able to contribute to it, you may be able to help one of your fellow openstackers attend the summit. As you all know, it is a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > The general statement of "people care more about features than > usability/stability" gets thrown around a lot. And gets lots of head > nodding. But rarely comes with specifics. I think a lot of this general sentiment comes from

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: > On 05.05.2017 14:12, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 05/05/2017 07:16 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: >>> So perhaps there is a (naive?) option #3: Do not support or nurse gates >>> for stable branches upstream. Instead, only create

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2017-05-04 20:09:35 -0400: > On 04/05/17 10:14, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Chris Dent wrote: > >> On Wed, 3 May 2017, Drew Fisher wrote: > >>> "Most large customers move slowly and thus are running older versions, > >>> which are EOL upstream sometimes before

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05.05.2017 14:12, Sean Dague wrote: > On 05/05/2017 07:16 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: >> So perhaps there is a (naive?) option #3: Do not support or nurse gates >> for stable branches upstream. Instead, only create and close them and >> attach 3rd party gating, if asked by contributors willing

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 08:50 AM, Dean Troyer wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> The general statement of "people care more about features than >> usability/stability" gets thrown around a lot. And gets lots of head >> nodding. But rarely comes with specifics. >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 2017-05-04 20:09:35 -0400 (-0400), Zane Bitter wrote: > On 04/05/17 10:14, Thierry Carrez wrote: [...] > >Maintaining stable branches has a cost. Keeping the infrastructure that > >ensures that stable branches are actually working is a complex endeavor > >that requires people to constantly pay

[openstack-dev] [api] [docs] Contributor and reviewer stats for API docs

Hi all, I've started a patch to the openstack-infra/reviewstats repo [1] to measure the number of reviews, reviewers, contributors, and contributions to API docs where the docs are housed in project repos. A couple of goals can be realized if we know more: to determine the experts in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] Should the Technical Committee meetings be dropped?

On 05/04/2017 01:10 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > Some of the current TC activities depend on the meeting to some extent: > > * We use the meeting to give the final ack on some the formal-vote reviews. > * Some folks (tc members and not) use the meeting agenda to know what they > should be

[openstack-dev] [heat] postpone our next meeting to 5/17 for Boston summit

Dear team As Boston summit is next week, we will postpone our next meeting to 5/17. In another word, we will not have the meeting on next week. Feel free to raise any discussion in #heat irc channel. -- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, *Rico Lin*irc: ricolin

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 05:16 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: I may be wrong, but I have a strong perception that even when major upgrades run smooth and flawless, operators tend to operate legacy enterprise software for long, long, long. It would be an utopia to expect any changes here, IMO. One reason for

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 06:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: Probably because they are still on Kilo. Not sure how much they could be contributing to the current when their customers are demanding that something is rock solid which by now looks nothing like the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Davanum Srinivas wrote: > I would encourage folks here to help the stable branches we have right > now! Release/Requirements constantly wait on Stable team and Stable > team is way short of hands. > > Please join #openstack-stable, throw your name in wiki etc >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: > configuration and usability issues. But those aren't exciting so > people don't want to work on them... [Not picking on Alex here, but I've seen this repeated again in this thread like every other one]

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > On Fri, 5 May 2017, Alex Schultz wrote: > >> You have to understand that as I'm mainly dealing with having to >> actually deploy/configure the software, when I see 'new project X' >> that does 'cool new things Y, Z' it

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 5 May 2017 at 11:33, Alex Schultz wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >> On Fri, 5 May 2017, Alex Schultz wrote: >> >>> You have to understand that as I'm mainly dealing with having to >>> actually deploy/configure the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 5/5/2017 9:30 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Davanum Srinivas wrote: I would encourage folks here to help the stable branches we have right now! Release/Requirements constantly wait on Stable team and Stable team is way short of hands. Please join #openstack-stable, throw your name in wiki etc

[openstack-dev] [MassivelyDistributed] Fog / Edge / Massively Distributed Cloud Sessions during the summit

Dear all, A brief email to inform you about our schedule next week in Boston. In addition to interesting presentations that will deal with Fog/Edge/Massively Distributed Clouds challenges [1], I would like to highlight two important sessions: * A new Birds of a Feather session ``OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][all] So long, and thanks for all the fish

Good luck !! it was nice working with you. > -Original Message- > From: John Davidge [mailto:john.davi...@rackspace.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 3:08 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) d...@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: [openstack-dev]

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:24:49AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > [snip] > > Cinder theoretically supports LVM/iSCSI, but if you actually try to use it > for anything stressful it falls over. > A bit of a tangent, but I would love to hear more about this. We have a lot of folks using LVM

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: >> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >>> On Wed, 3 May 2017, Drew Fisher wrote: >>> This email is meant to be the ML discussion of a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, 5 May 2017, Alex Schultz wrote: You have to understand that as I'm mainly dealing with having to actually deploy/configure the software, when I see 'new project X' that does 'cool new things Y, Z' it makes me cringe. Because it's just added complexity for new features that who knows if

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [stable] ironic-stable-maint update proposal

Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > With no objections recorded, I think we can make this change. Tony or > someone with required ACL, could you please do it? Done! -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: Would it be accurate to say, then, that from your perpsective the tendency of OpenStack to adopt new projects willy nilly contributes to the sense of features winning out over deployment, configuration and usability issues? Personally I don't care

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 11:52 AM, Dean Troyer wrote: On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: configuration and usability issues. But those aren't exciting so people don't want to work on them... [Not picking on Alex here, but I've seen this repeated again in this

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Dean Troyer wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: >> configuration and usability issues. But those aren't exciting so >> people don't want to work on them... > > [Not picking on Alex here, but I've

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

+1. ocata's cell v2 stuff added a lot of extra required complexity with no perceivable benefit to end users. If there was a long term stable version, then putting it in the non lts release would have been ok. In absence of lts, I would have recommended the cell v2 stuff have been done in a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 12:36 PM, Alex Schultz wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: >> >> The general statement of "people care more about features than >> usability/stability" gets thrown around a lot. And gets lots of

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 10:09 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 05/05/2017 06:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: > >>> Probably because they are still on Kilo. Not sure how much they could >>> be contributing to the current when their customers are demanding that >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Chris Friesen wrote: > On 05/05/2017 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > > Would it be accurate to say, then, that from your perpsective the >> tendency of OpenStack to adopt new projects willy nilly contributes >> to the sense of features

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

> +1. ocata's cell v2 stuff added a lot of extra required complexity > with no perceivable benefit to end users. If there was a long term > stable version, then putting it in the non lts release would have > been ok. In absence of lts, I would have recommended the cell v2 > stuff have been done in

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 02:04:43PM -0600, John Griffith wrote: :On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Chris Friesen :> Cinder theoretically supports LVM/iSCSI, but if you actually try to use it :> for anything stressful it falls over. :> : :​Oh really?​ : :​I'd love some

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

+1 On 5/5/2017 3:46 PM, Alex Schultz wrote: Sooo... I always get a little triggered when I hear that OpenStack is hard to deploy. We've spent last few years fixing it and I think it's pretty well fixed now. Even as we speak I'm deploying 500+ vms on OpenStack cluster I deployed last week

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Fox, Kevin M wrote: Note, when I say OpenStack below, I'm talking about nova/glance/cinder/neutron/horizon/heat/octavia/designate. No offence to the other projects intended. just trying to constrain the conversation a bit... Those parts are fairly comparable to what k8s provides. I think

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 5/5/2017 11:36 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: The cell v2 initial implementation was neither usable or stable (for my definition of stable). Yea you could say 'but it's a work and progress' and I would say, why is it required for the end user then? If I wanted to I could probably go back and go

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 04:17:29PM -0400, Jonathan Proulx wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 02:04:43PM -0600, John Griffith wrote: > :On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Chris Friesen > > :> Cinder theoretically supports LVM/iSCSI, but if you actually try to use it > :>

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

You are talking about OpenStack being hard because it's complex and at the same time you're talking about using "non-linux-mainstream" tools around. It's either flexibility or ease guys... Prescriptive is easy, flexible is hard. When you want to learn about linux you're not starting from compiling

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 02:34 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: I don't have a nice way to wrap this up. I'm depressed and just want to go outside. I don't expect pleasant replies to my rant, so I probably won't reply again after this anyway since this is always a never-ending back and forth which just leaves

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Octave, Folks, "If we had an LTS branch and a solid governance model" - The way to make it happen is for everyone to show up in the Stable team, do the work that is need to define/setup etc.. Who is up for it? Please show up in the next weekly meeting and get active in the work needed to take

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Hi Matt, And this is actually part of the problem for vendors. Many Oracle engineers, including myself, have tried to get features and fixes pushed upstream. While that may sound easy, the reality is that it isn't! In many cases, it takes months for us to get something in or we get shot down

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 05/05/2017 02:04 PM, John Griffith wrote: On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Chris Friesen > wrote: On 05/05/2017 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: Would it be accurate to say, then, that from your perpsective the

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Thank you Alex for the points you made below. These are some of the big issues that I see all OpenStack customers and operators struggling with. Regardless of the tools that the community or vendors put on the table, OpenStack is still a very complicated piece of technology to deploy and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Michał Jastrzębski wrote: > On 5 May 2017 at 11:33, Alex Schultz wrote: >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Chris Dent wrote: >>> On Fri, 5 May 2017, Alex Schultz wrote: >>> You have to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 5/5/2017 3:23 PM, Octave J. Orgeron wrote: From a vendors perspective, it's incredibly difficult to keep up with the releases because once you get your automation tooling and any extra value-added components integrated with a release, it's more than likely already behind or EOL. Plus there

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][ptl][goals] Community goals for Queen

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Mike Perez wrote: > Hello everyone, > > May 11th at 11:00-12:30 at the forum we will be discussing our community wide > goals for the Queen release [1]! > > We do OpenStack-wide goals to "achieve visible common changes, push for basic > levels

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 05/05/2017 12:36 PM, Alex Schultz wrote: >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: >>> >>> The general statement of "people care more about features

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On 5/4/2017 10:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote: On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Chris Dent wrote: I know you're not speaking as the voice of your employer when making this message, so this is not directed at you, but from what I can tell Oracle's presense upstream (both

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Note, when I say OpenStack below, I'm talking about nova/glance/cinder/neutron/horizon/heat/octavia/designate. No offence to the other projects intended. just trying to constrain the conversation a bit... Those parts are fairly comparable to what k8s provides. I think part of your point is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Zun] Proposal a change of Zun core team

Hi all, Thanks for your vote. According to the feedback, I adjusted the core team membership accordingly. Welcome Feng Shengqin to the core team. https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/1382,members Best regards, Hongbin From: shubham sharma [mailto:shubham@gmail.com] Sent: May-02-17

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][ptl][goals] Community goals for Queen

On 05/05/2017 05:09 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: This time is tough given how front-loaded the sessions are at the Forum on Monday. The Nova onboarding session overlaps with this, along with some other sessions that impact or are related to Nova. It would have been nice to do stuff like this

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - are you attending the Boston summit?

Hey Neutron Folks, Following our past tradition, we should have Neutron dinner while we are all in Boston. Miguel has few places in mind. I would propose that we nominate him as the dinner organizer lieutenant. Miguel, I hope you will take us to some cool place. Thanks -Sukhdev On Thu, Apr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] stepping down from core

Rossella, It has been nothing but pleasure working with you. Wish you best of luck in your new endeavors. regards.. -Sukhdev On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Rossella Sblendido wrote: > Hi all, > > I've moved to a new position recently and despite my best intentions I >

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > "If we had an LTS branch and a solid governance model" - The way to > make it happen is for everyone to show up in the Stable team, do the > work that is need to define/setup etc.. > > Who is up for it? Please show up in

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][ptl][goals] Community goals for Queen

On 5/5/2017 10:47 AM, Mike Perez wrote: Hello everyone, May 11th at 11:00-12:30 at the forum we will be discussing our community wide goals for the Queen release [1]! We do OpenStack-wide goals to "achieve visible common changes, push for basic levels of consistency and user experience, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

+1. From: Octave J. Orgeron [octave.orge...@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 1:23 PM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time Thank you Alex for the