On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:24:01PM -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
> Here's another thought: is the big-bang integrated 6-month fixed release
> cycle useful any more? Can we talk about using more of a moving train model
> that doesn't have these long freeze cycles? At least for some of the
> projects, I th
Agreed. It causes two problems:
1) 9 month delays in getting code into a release
2) Some projects consider something to be breakable, from a back
compatibility point of view, until it has made a formal release, which
means anybody cutting releases from anything other than final/stable is
facing th
On 02/23/2015 04:02 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 02/23/2015 03:45 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of 6-month releases again? We are a
free-form open source set of projects, with a lot of intelligent
engineers. Why are we stuck using an outdated release model?
I've been wondering
> What's the alternative proposed release model?
I deleted a couple paragraphs of the above before sending this, thinking
(like Joe) that there probably needs to be a specific discussion aimed
at this topic. But:
> What's the compatibility story with Glance / Neutron / Cinder in
> whatever that m
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:47:20PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> On 02/20/2015 11:33 PM, Sourabh Patwardhan (sopatwar) wrote:
> > Nova core reviewers,
> >
> > May I request an FFE for Cisco VIF driver:
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/157616/
> >
> > This is a small isolated change similar t
On 02/20/2015 11:33 PM, Sourabh Patwardhan (sopatwar) wrote:
> Nova core reviewers,
>
> May I request an FFE for Cisco VIF driver:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/157616/
>
> This is a small isolated change similar to the vhostuser / open contrail
> vif drivers for which FFE has been granted.
rg>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Outcome of the nova FFE meeting for Kilo
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Matt Riedemann
mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
On 2/16/2015 9:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Mikal, sorry for top-posting. What was the final decision regarding
the
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
>
>
> On 2/16/2015 9:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>
>> Hi Mikal, sorry for top-posting. What was the final decision regarding
>> the instance tagging work?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -jay
>>
>> On 02/16/2015 09:44 PM, Michael Still wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
On 2/16/2015 9:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Mikal, sorry for top-posting. What was the final decision regarding
the instance tagging work?
Thanks,
-jay
On 02/16/2015 09:44 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi,
we had a meeting this morning to try and work through all the FFE
requests for Nova. The mee
Hi Mikal, sorry for top-posting. What was the final decision regarding
the instance tagging work?
Thanks,
-jay
On 02/16/2015 09:44 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi,
we had a meeting this morning to try and work through all the FFE
requests for Nova. The meeting was pretty long -- two hours or so -
Hi,
we had a meeting this morning to try and work through all the FFE
requests for Nova. The meeting was pretty long -- two hours or so --
and we did in in the nova IRC channel in an attempt to be as open as
possible. The agenda for the meeting was the list of FFE requests at
https://etherpad.open
11 matches
Mail list logo
