Robert Collins wrote:
I think you have a very different definition of -core to the rest of
OpenStack. I was actually somewhat concerned about the '+2 Guard the
gate stuff' at the summit because it's so easily misinterpreted - and
there is a meme going around (I don't know if it's true or not)
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
That's why I thought
creating VIP parties for +2 reviewers (or giving them special badges or
T-shirts) is spreading the wrong message, and encourage people to hang
on to the extra rights associated with the duty.
On 09/12/13 06:31, Steven Hardy wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we can agree and communicate our expectations related to
nomination for
Excerpts from Steven Hardy's message of 2013-12-09 03:31:36 -0800:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we can agree and communicate our expectations
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2013-12-09 09:52:25 -0800:
On 09/12/13 06:31, Steven Hardy wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we
On 09/12/13 14:03, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2013-12-09 09:52:25 -0800:
On 09/12/13 06:31, Steven Hardy wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted
On 10 December 2013 00:31, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we can agree and communicate our expectations
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:34:04AM +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 10 December 2013 00:31, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
On 10 December 2013 11:04, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote:
So it's a gross mischaracterisation to imply that a democratic process
aided by some [crude] stats has been reduced to name shame, and a
rather offensive one.
Yes I have read your monthly core reviewer update emails[1] and I
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:25:49AM +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 10 December 2013 11:04, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote:
So it's a gross mischaracterisation to imply that a democratic process
aided by some [crude] stats has been reduced to name shame, and a
rather offensive one.
On 09/12/13 11:31 +, Steven Hardy wrote:
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we can agree and communicate our expectations related to
nomination for
Hi all,
So I've been getting concerned about $subject recently, and based on some
recent discussions so have some other heat-core folks, so I wanted to start
a discussion where we can agree and communicate our expectations related to
nomination for heat-core membership (becuase we do need more
Steven Hardy wrote:
[...]
The issues I have are:
- Russell's stats (while very useful) are being used by some projects as
the principal metric related to -core membership (ref TripleO's monthly
cull/nameshame, which I am opposed to btw). This is in some cases
encouraging some
On 12/09/2013 07:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Steven Hardy wrote:
[...]
The issues I have are:
- Russell's stats (while very useful) are being used by some projects as
the principal metric related to -core membership (ref TripleO's monthly
cull/nameshame, which I am opposed to btw).
14 matches
Mail list logo