On 06/16/2014 10:06 PM, James Slagle wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Tomas Sedovic tsedo...@redhat.com wrote:
If we do promise backwards compatibility, we should document it
somewhere and if we don't we should probably make that more visible,
too, so people know what to expect.
I
On 19 June 2014 10:01, Giulio Fidente gfide...@redhat.com wrote:
From a the 10.000 feet view, I can imagine people relying on a stable API
for services like Cinder but I don't see how that applies to TripleO
Why should one try to install an older version of OpenStack using some
'recent'
On 16/06/14 18:51, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Tomas Sedovic's message of 2014-06-16 09:19:40 -0700:
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to tripleo-heat-templates[3],
reviewers suggested adding a deprecation period for the merge.py script.
While TripleO is an official
Excerpts from Tomas Sedovic's message of 2014-06-17 04:56:24 -0700:
On 16/06/14 18:51, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Tomas Sedovic's message of 2014-06-16 09:19:40 -0700:
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to tripleo-heat-templates[3],
reviewers suggested adding a
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to tripleo-heat-templates[3],
reviewers suggested adding a deprecation period for the merge.py script.
While TripleO is an official OpenStack program, none of the projects
under its umbrella (including tripleo-heat-templates) have gone through
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon 16 Jun 2014 10:19:40 AM MDT, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to
tripleo-heat-templates[3], reviewers suggested adding a deprecation
period for the merge.py script.
While TripleO is an official
On 16 June 2014 17:30, Jason Rist jr...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm going to have to agree with Tomas here. There doesn't seem to be
any reasonable expectation of backwards compatibility for the reasons
he outlined, despite some downstream releases that may be impacted.
Backward compatibility is a
] Backwards compatibility policy for our
projects
On 16 June 2014 17:30, Jason Rist jr...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm going to have to agree with Tomas here. There doesn't seem to be
any reasonable expectation of backwards compatibility for the reasons
he outlined, despite some downstream releases
Excerpts from Tomas Sedovic's message of 2014-06-16 09:19:40 -0700:
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to tripleo-heat-templates[3],
reviewers suggested adding a deprecation period for the merge.py script.
While TripleO is an official OpenStack program, none of the projects
Excerpts from Duncan Thomas's message of 2014-06-16 09:41:49 -0700:
On 16 June 2014 17:30, Jason Rist jr...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm going to have to agree with Tomas here. There doesn't seem to be
any reasonable expectation of backwards compatibility for the reasons
he outlined, despite some
Hi Clint
This looks like a special pleading here - all OpenStack projects (or
'program' if you prefer - I'm honestly not seeing a difference) have
bits that they've written quickly and would rather not have to
maintain, but in order to allow people to make use of them downstream
have to do that
Excerpts from Duncan Thomas's message of 2014-06-16 10:46:12 -0700:
Hi Clint
This looks like a special pleading here - all OpenStack projects (or
'program' if you prefer - I'm honestly not seeing a difference) have
bits that they've written quickly and would rather not have to
maintain, but
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Tomas Sedovic tsedo...@redhat.com wrote:
All,
After having proposed some changes[1][2] to tripleo-heat-templates[3],
reviewers suggested adding a deprecation period for the merge.py script.
While TripleO is an official OpenStack program, none of the projects
13 matches
Mail list logo
