For better or for worse we have already merged about half of the
patches for this series, so I think stopping now because of concerns
about CI is pretty arbitrary. I do think Sean's point about scheduler
tests outside of tempest is valid though and I'd like to see it
reflected in the review comment
On 09/05/2014 11:20 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
On 5 September 2014 13:59, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor their own
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 04:20:14PM +0100, John Garbutt wrote:
> On 5 September 2014 13:59, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> > Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
> > this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
> > sponsored it, and as per [1]
On 09/05/2014 05:20 PM, John Garbutt wrote:
> On 5 September 2014 13:59, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>> Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
>> this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
>> sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor th
On 5 September 2014 13:59, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
> this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
> sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor their own FFEs so that's 3.
While I am no fan of t
On 09/05/2014 04:48 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Quick response as not to hijack the thread:
I think we all agree on the benefits of having resources you can turn
off and on at will.
I don't agree at all. There's no cost whatsoever in "turning on" a
resource. It doesn't need to be extensible. Re
Since this did not get an 'Approved' as of yet, I want to make sure that
this is not because the number of sponsors. 2 core members have already
sponsored it, and as per [1] cores can sponsor their own FFEs so that's 3.
N.
[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/0446
On 09/04/2014 07:42 PM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote:
>
>
>>
>
>>> Anyway, not enough to -1 it, but enough to at least say something.
>
>>
>
>>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> .. but I do not want to get into the discussion about software testing
>
>>
>
>> here, not the place really.
>
>>
>
>> Anyway, not enough to -1 it, but enough to at least say something.
>
>>
>
>
>
> .. but I do not want to get into the discussion about software testing
>
> here, not the place really.
>
>
>
> However, I do think it is very harmful to respond to FFE request with
>
> such blanket statements and
> -Original Message-
> From: Nikola Đipanov [mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 4:22 PM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][FFE] Feature freeze exception for virt-
> driver-numa-placement
>
>
On 09/04/2014 04:51 PM, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud) wrote:
>
>
> On 4 September 2014 14:07, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>
> On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>
>> On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>
>>> Hi team,
>
>>>
>
>>> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the
On 4 September 2014 14:07, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>> Hi team,
>>
>> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
>> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
>>
>> Some reasons why
On 9/4/14, 4:30 PM, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>On 09/04/2014 09:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>>> On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> I am requesti
On 09/04/2014 09:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>> On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>> On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hi team,
I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 03:07:24PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> > On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> >> Hi team,
> >>
> >> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
> >> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]
On 09/04/2014 02:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>> Hi team,
>>
>> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
>> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
>>
>> Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
>>
>> First of all all pa
On 09/04/2014 12:58 PM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
>
> Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
>
> First of all all patches have been approved in time and just lost th
On 09/04/2014 07:58 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
>
> Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
>
> First of all all patches have been approved in time and just lost th
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:58:58PM +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> I am requesting the exception for the feature from the subject (find
> specs at [1] and outstanding changes at [2]).
>
> Some reasons why we may want to grant it:
>
> First of all all patches have been approved in tim
19 matches
Mail list logo
