s,
-Nikhil
From: Gary Kotton
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2015 11:45 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
On 3/8/15, 2:34 PM, "Flavio Percoco" wrote:
>On 07/03/15 23:16 +, Nikhil Komawar
_
From: Gary Kotton
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2015 11:45 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
On 3/8/15, 2:34 PM, "Flavio Percoco" wrote:
>On 07/03/15 23:16 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
>&
inimum, hence the core-reviewers team.
>
>Anyone should feel free to vote, speak up and most importantly,
>everyones opinion *must* be taken into account.
>
>I'll wait for your final proposal to give a more constructive and
>extended opinion based on that.
>
>Flavio
>
From: Hemanth Makkapati
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 7:15 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
I like the idea of a 'core-member'. But, how are core-members different from
cor
wered your questions, at least for the time being!
Cheers
-Nikhil
From: Hemanth Makkapati
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 7:15 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
I like the idea of a &#
n of new
cores.
-Hemanth.
From: Nikhil Komawar
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 4:04 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
Thank you all for the input outside of the program: Kyle, Ihar,
tion in the following weeks.
Hope it works!
Thanks for taking care of this,
Flavio
Regards,
-Nikhil
From: Kyle Mestery
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 12:45 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-
idation done. It must be evident
>that the list-cleanup proposed above is not comprehensive with regards to
>who is truly inactive. Thus, misses out on a few names due to lack of
>established criterion. We can do more about
> rotation in the following weeks.
>
>
>Hope it works!
>
>
>
>Regar
ew names due to lack of established criterion.
We can do more about rotation in the following weeks.
Hope it works!
Regards,
-Nikhil
From: Kyle Mestery
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 12:45 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Su
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Ian Cordasco
wrote:
> I like that idea. Can you start it out with Nova or Neutron’s guidelines?
>
> FYI, the core reviewer guidelines for Neutron are in-tree now [1], along
with all of our other policies around operating in Neutron [2].
[1]
https://github.com/ope
I like that idea. Can you start it out with Nova or Neutron’s guidelines?
On 3/5/15, 17:38, "Mikhail Fedosin" wrote:
>I think yes, it does. But I mean that now we're writing a document called
>Glance Review Guidelines
>
>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Iia0BjQoXvry9XSbf30DRwQt--ODglw-ZTT_5R
I think yes, it does. But I mean that now we're writing a document called
Glance Review Guidelines
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Iia0BjQoXvry9XSbf30DRwQt--ODglw-ZTT_5RJabsI/edit?usp=sharing
and it has a section "For cores". It's easy to include some concrete rules
there to add more clarity.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/05/2015 11:35 AM, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
> Yes, it's absolutely right. For example, Nova and Neutron have
> official rules for that:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/CoreTeam where it says: "A
> member of the team may be removed at any tim
Yes, it's absolutely right. For example, Nova and Neutron have official
rules for that:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/CoreTeam
where it says: "A member of the team may be removed at any time by the PTL.
This is typically due to a drop off of involvement by the member such that
they are no lo
On 3/4/15 11:31 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Flavio Percoco wrote:
[...]
I personally don't think adding new cores without cleaning up that
list is something healthy for our community, which is what we're
trying to improve here. Therefore I'm still -2-W on adding new folks
without removing non-acti
Flavio Percoco wrote:
> [...]
> I personally don't think adding new cores without cleaning up that
> list is something healthy for our community, which is what we're
> trying to improve here. Therefore I'm still -2-W on adding new folks
> without removing non-active core members.
It's also *extrem
-Original Message-
From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 4:09 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Cc: krag...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
On 03/03/15 16:10 +, Nikhil Komawar
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 07:38:42AM -0430, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> I'm sorry but no. I don't think there's anything that requires extra
> patience than 2 (or even more) cycles without provaiding reviews or
> even any kind of active contribution.
>
> I personally don't think adding new cores without
> From: Nikhil Komawar [mailto:nikhil.koma...@rackspace.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:10 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Daniel P.
> Berrange
> Cc: krag...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
>
ly important to have the list of members
updated, some folks rely on that to know who are the contacts for some
projects.
Flavio
Best,
-Nikhil
━━━
From: Kuvaja, Erno
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:48 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Daniel P.
Berrange
Cc: krag..
beginning and be implemented in L, ensuring out
>empathetic stand.
>
>
>
>
>The essence of the matter is:
>We need to change the dynamics slowly and with patience for maintaining a
>good balance.
>
>
>
>Best,
>-Nikhil
>
>
>_____________
___
From: Kuvaja, Erno
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:48 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Daniel P.
Berrange
Cc: krag...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
Nikhil,
If I recall correctly this matter was di
om<mailto:krag...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
+1 on both proposals: rotation is definitely a step in right direction.
--
Regards,
Alexander Tivelkov
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Daniel P. Berrange
mailto:berra...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Cheers,
-Nikhil
From: Alexander Tivelkov
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 7:26 AM
To: Daniel P. Berrange; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions)
Cc: krag...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Core nominations.
+1 on both proposa
On 24/02/15 08:57 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 24/02/15 04:38 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose the following members to become part of the Glance core
team:
Ian Cordasco
Louis Taylor
Mike Fedosin
Hemanth Makkapati
Please, yes!
Actually - I hope this doesn't c
On 24/02/15 04:38 +, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to propose the following members to become part of the Glance core
team:
Ian Cordasco
Louis Taylor
Mike Fedosin
Hemanth Makkapati
Please, yes!
They have been contributing significant numbers of high quality reviews in the
26 matches
Mail list logo
