Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

2016-08-16 Thread Jim Meyer
> On Aug 15, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Jim Meyer's message of 2016-08-15 09:37:36 -0700: >> A fast reply where others will expand further (I hope): >> >>> On Aug 15, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

2016-08-15 Thread Jim Meyer
A fast reply where others will expand further (I hope): > On Aug 15, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> My vote is the following: >> >> GET /capabilities <-- returns a set of *actions* or *abilities* that the >> user is capable of performing > > Does this

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] Results of the TC Election

2016-04-09 Thread Jim Meyer
On Apr 8, 2016, at 2:21 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote: > Another approach to consider would be to continue to offer the ATC > pass for a single commit, but to require a little more participation > in order to vote in TC/PTL elections (modulo Foundation bye-laws etc.) +1 on this. A

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

2016-04-08 Thread Jim Meyer
On Apr 8, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > > On 04/08/2016 03:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> Thanks for taking this up--some people just need >> encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the >> other hand, if you find that many of them have addresses

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] FYI: Removing default flavors from nova

2016-04-06 Thread Jim Meyer
> On Apr 6, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > On 04/06/2016 01:28 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Tim Bell > > wrote: >> >>I think Heat needs more of an query engine along the lines of “give me a

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA] Not running for PTL

2016-03-11 Thread Jim Meyer
> On Mar 11, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm writing this to announce that I am not running for QA PTL this cycle. I've > been the QA PTL for the past 4 cycles and I think it's time for another person > to take over the role. I think

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

2016-02-15 Thread Jim Meyer
On Feb 15, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > >> On 2016-02-15 04:36:25 -0500 (-0500), Eoghan Glynn wrote: >> [...] >> Traditionally all ATCs earn a free pass for summit, whereas the >> other attendees pay $600 or more for entry. I'm wondering if (a) >> there's some

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

2016-02-09 Thread Jim Meyer
> On Feb 5, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > ... > >> On "production-grade": >> >> I'd be (strongly) in favor of defining a target deployment configuration and >> size which we find representative of the minimum bar for "production-grade." >> Anything less concrete

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

2016-02-08 Thread Jim Meyer
On Feb 8, 2016, at 7:07 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Brian Curtin wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: >>> I would love to see the OpenStack contributor community take back the design >>> summit to its original format and

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Proposal: Separate design summits from OpenStack conferences

2016-02-08 Thread Jim Meyer
This thread is going many directions all at once, so I'll somewhat rudely top-reply and call out specific points rather than extend each sub-thread. Thierry, I suspect your strawman will address all of these points and more. Decoupling: I'm very much in favor. For a long time, devs at summits

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

2016-02-05 Thread Jim Meyer
On "production-grade": > On Feb 5, 2016, at 6:23 AM, Tim Bell wrote: > > From: Dean Troyer > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > Date: Friday 5 February 2016 at 14:57 > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-ansible] To NTP, or not to NTP, that is the question

2015-09-19 Thread Jim Meyer
> On Sep 18, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> On 09/18/2015 11:04 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: >>> On 9/18/15, 08:03, "Major Hayden" wrote: >>> >>> Hey there, >>> >>> I start working on a bug[1] last night about adding a managed NTP >>> configuration to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][TC] 'team:danger-not-diverse tag' and my concerns

2015-09-11 Thread Jim Meyer
On Sep 11, 2015, at 12:45 PM, Shamail Tahir wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Joshua Harlow > wrote: > Hi all, > > I was reading over the TC IRC logs for this week (my weekly reading) and I > just wanted to let

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Take back the naming process

2015-01-27 Thread Jim Meyer
+1 all the way down. More fun double-plus-good. —j On Jan 27, 2015, at 1:50 PM, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote: I do not like how we are selecting names for our releases right now. The current process is autocratic and opaque and not fun - which is the exact opposite of what a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing some DevOps love to Openstack

2014-10-29 Thread Jim Meyer
On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Philip Cheong philip.che...@elastx.se wrote: Yes, the aim is to get a vagrant-openstack provider plugin under Hashicorp's or Mitchellh's github account. Whether you call that official or blessed, doesn't really matter. In order for Vagrant to integrate with