On 5/23/2017 7:12 PM, Michael Glasgow wrote:
A slight disadvantage of this approach is that the resulting
incongruence between the client and the API is obfuscating. When an end
user can make accurate inferences about the API based on how the client
works, that's a form of transparency that
On 6/2/2017 12:40 AM, 한승진 wrote:
Hello, stackers
I am just curious about the results of lots of discussions on the below
blueprint.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-volume-type-with-bdm-parameter
Can I ask what the concolusion is?
Hello, stackers
I am just curious about the results of lots of discussions on the below
blueprint.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-volume-type-with-bdm-parameter
Can I ask what the concolusion is?
__
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Sean McGinnis
> wrote:
> >
> >> If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
> >> the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy
It’s definitely a nice feature to have for end user, actually we implemented it
our own because we need this but
nova doesn’t support.
Yingjun
> On May 24, 2017, at 6:58 AM, Jay Bryant wrote:
>
>
> On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23 May 2017
On 5/23/2017 4:43 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
In this particular case it may not be necessary, but I think early
implementation of composite features in clients is actually the right
way to prove the utility of these things going forward. Establish and
document the process, implement in a way for
On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 23 May 2017 4:51 am, "Matt Riedemann" > wrote:
Is this really something we are going to have to deny at least
once per release? My God how is it that this is the #1 thing
everyone
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>
>> If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
>> the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy conversations with Nova folks
>> I get it), do we consider just orchestrating this from say
If it's just too much debt and risk of slippery slope type arguments on
the Nova side (and that's fair, after lengthy conversations with Nova
folks I get it), do we consider just orchestrating this from say
OpenStack Client completely? The last resort (and it's an awful option)
is
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>
>> Is it entirely unreasonable to turn the question around and ask why,
>> given it is such a commonly requested feature, the Nova team are so
>> resistant to it?
>>
>
>
On 5/23/2017 9:56 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
Is it entirely unreasonable to turn the question around and ask why,
given it is such a commonly requested feature, the Nova team are so
resistant to it?
Because it's technical debt for one thing. Adding more orchestration
adds complexity, which
On 23 May 2017 4:51 am, "Matt Riedemann" wrote:
Is this really something we are going to have to deny at least once per
release? My God how is it that this is the #1 thing everyone for all time
has always wanted Nova to do for them?
Is it entirely unreasonable to turn
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:47:44PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> Just wanted to point out that someone else requested this again today:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466595/
>
> 30 seconds going through launchpad for old blueprints found at least 4
> others:
>
>
Just wanted to point out that someone else requested this again today:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466595/
30 seconds going through launchpad for old blueprints found at least 4
others:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/vol-type-with-blank-vol
14 matches
Mail list logo