On 19/06/17 11:33 -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote:
[snip]
Who else would like to volunteer to help?
The help needed is not so much on fixing bugs but rather reviewing the patches
that fix bugs and help moving the release forward. I hope the community will
grow soonish so that we can go back to the r
[snip]
> Who else would like to volunteer to help?
>
> The help needed is not so much on fixing bugs but rather reviewing the patches
> that fix bugs and help moving the release forward. I hope the community will
> grow soonish so that we can go back to the regular core team.
>
> Flavio
>
> [0]
On 13/06/17 09:50 -0500, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 13/06/17 10:49 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Quick attempt at a summary of the discussion so far, with my questions:
* Short-term, Glance needs help to stay afloat
- Sean volunteered to help
- but glance needs to add core reviewers to get stuff f
On 13/06/17 10:49 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Quick attempt at a summary of the discussion so far, with my questions:
* Short-term, Glance needs help to stay afloat
- Sean volunteered to help
- but glance needs to add core reviewers to get stuff flowing
-> could the VM/BM workgroup also help
Quick attempt at a summary of the discussion so far, with my questions:
* Short-term, Glance needs help to stay afloat
- Sean volunteered to help
- but glance needs to add core reviewers to get stuff flowing
-> could the VM/BM workgroup also help ? Any progress there ?
* Long-term, is Glance
On 06/12/2017 01:50 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Glance can be very exciting if one focuses on the interesting bits and it's an
*AWESOME* place where new comers can start contributing, new developers can
learn and practice, etc. That said, I believe that code doesn't have to be
challenging to be ex
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:43 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017, 19:47 Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Flavio Percoco
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
>>>
My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really har
I take a week off and look at what happens ...
Sorry for top-posting, but I just have some general comments. Mike
raises some good points, but I think it's too late in the cycle to
swap Glance out for Glare and expect everything to work properly. (I
don't mean to imply anything about the quality
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017, 19:47 Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Flavio Percoco
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
>>> features there. In two years, only one major im
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
>
>> My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
>> features there. In two years, only one major improvement was developed
>> (Image Import Refactoring), and no
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017, 19:25 Mike Perez wrote:
> On 16:01 Jun 12, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> > On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
> > > My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement
> new
> > > features there. In two years, only one major improvement was developed
On 16:01 Jun 12, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
> > My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
> > features there. In two years, only one major improvement was developed
> > (Image Import Refactoring), and no one has tested it
On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
features there. In two years, only one major improvement was developed
(Image Import Refactoring), and no one has tested it in production yet. And
this is in the heyday of the
Well... My suggestion is to keep Glance maintained and begin experimental
adoption of Glare. So this is not an immediate replacement, but the
evolution of the Image service.
My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
features there. In two years, only one major improv
On 12/06/17 15:37 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 06/12/2017 03:20 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Could you please elaborate more on why you think switching code bases is
going
to solve the current problem? In your email you talked about Glance's
over-engineered code as being the thing driving people aw
On 06/12/2017 03:20 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> Could you please elaborate more on why you think switching code bases is
> going
> to solve the current problem? In your email you talked about Glance's
> over-engineered code as being the thing driving people away and while I
> disagree
> with that
On 12/06/17 16:56 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
Hello!
Flavio raised a very difficult and important question, and I think that we,
as community members, should decide what to do with Glance next.
Hi Mike,
I will try to state my subjective opinion. I was involved in the Glance
project for al
Just quick comment here on my day off. I will get proper reply to the
chain itself tomorrow when I'm back.
While I cannot argue with all Mike's points below, I personally cannot
stand behind his proposals here and just want to indicate that this is
view of one member, not the Glance community by w
Hello!
Flavio raised a very difficult and important question, and I think that we,
as community members, should decide what to do with Glance next.
I will try to state my subjective opinion. I was involved in the Glance
project for almost three years and studied it fairly plank. I believe that
th
On 12/06/17 09:13 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 06/09/2017 01:07 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
Would it be possible to get help w/ reviews from folks from teams like
nova/cinder/keystone? Any help is welcomed, of course, but I'm trying to
think
about teams that may be familiar with the Glance code/api
On 06/09/2017 01:07 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> (sorry if duplicate, having troubles with email)
>
> Hi Team,
>
> I've been working a bit with the Glance team and trying to help where I
> can and
> I can't but be worried about the critical status of the Glance team.
> Unfortunately, the number of
Flavio Percoco wrote:
> I've been working a bit with the Glance team and trying to help where I
> can and I can't but be worried about the critical status of the Glance team.
> Unfortunately, the number of participants in the Glance team has been
> reduced a lot resulting in the project not being a
(sorry if duplicate, having troubles with email)
Hi Team,
I've been working a bit with the Glance team and trying to help where I can
and
I can't but be worried about the critical status of the Glance team.
Unfortunately, the number of participants in the Glance team has been
reduced a
lot result
23 matches
Mail list logo