to:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Thursday, July 10, 2014 at 12:18 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [trove] Discussion of capabilities feature
On Wed, Ju
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Nikhil Manchanda
wrote:
>
> Joe Gordon writes:
>
> > [...]
> >> This sounds very similar to the v3/v2.1 discussion happening in nova.
> All
> >> OpenStack projects need to address these issues and it would be a shame
> if
> >> each project chose a different solutio
Joe Gordon writes:
> [...]
>> This sounds very similar to the v3/v2.1 discussion happening in nova. All
>> OpenStack projects need to address these issues and it would be a shame if
>> each project chose a different solution, perhaps this is a good topic for
>> the TC to help tackle? As having di
[mailto:iccha.se...@rackspace.com]
> > Sent: July-03-14 4:36 PM
> >
> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [trove] Discussion of capabilities feature
> >
> >
> >
> > Hey Doug,
> &g
gt; More feedback below…marked with [DAS]
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> From: Iccha Sethi [mailto:iccha.se...@rackspace.com]
> Sent: July-03-14 4:36 PM
>
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [trove] Dis
...@rackspace.com]
Sent: July-03-14 4:36 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [trove] Discussion of capabilities feature
Hey Doug,
Thank you so much for putting this together. I have some
questions/clarifications(inline) which would be useful to be
to:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Thursday, July 3, 2014 at 2:20 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
(openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>)"
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Su
At yesterday's Trove team meeting [1] there was significant discussion around
the Capabilities [2] feature. While the community previously approved a BP and
some of the initial implementation, it is apparent now that there is no
agreement in the community around the requirements, use cases or pr
