Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/05/2018 11:48 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2018-09-05 17:01:49 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] In a distro, no 2 package can hold the same file. That's forbidden. This has nothing to do if someone has to "import placemement" or not. Just saying this, but *not* that we should rename (I didn't spot any conflict yet and I understand the pain it would induce). This command returns nothing: apt-file search placement | grep python3/dist-packages/placement Well, also since the Placement maintainers have expressed that they aren't interested in making Python API contracts for it to be usable as an importable library, there's probably no need to install its modules into the global Python search path anyway. They could just go into a private module path on the filesystem instead as long as the placement service/entrypoint wrapper knows where to find them, right? Yep. -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 2018-09-05 17:01:49 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > In a distro, no 2 package can hold the same file. That's > forbidden. This has nothing to do if someone has to "import > placemement" or not. > > Just saying this, but *not* that we should rename (I didn't spot > any conflict yet and I understand the pain it would induce). This > command returns nothing: > > apt-file search placement | grep python3/dist-packages/placement Well, also since the Placement maintainers have expressed that they aren't interested in making Python API contracts for it to be usable as an importable library, there's probably no need to install its modules into the global Python search path anyway. They could just go into a private module path on the filesystem instead as long as the placement service/entrypoint wrapper knows where to find them, right? -- Jeremy Stanley signature.asc Description: PGP signature __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 06:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >> Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: >>> On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: > On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the >> package name? > > I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. > 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think > from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, > yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. >>> >>> You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name >>> "placement"? >>> >>> The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like >>> os_placement instead? > > Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. > The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level > placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. In a distro, no 2 package can hold the same file. That's forbidden. This has nothing to do if someone has to "import placemement" or not. Just saying this, but *not* that we should rename (I didn't spot any conflict yet and I understand the pain it would induce). This command returns nothing: apt-file search placement | grep python3/dist-packages/placement Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Sep 4, 2018, at 12:44 PM, Chris Dent wrote: > > Changing the name, again, is painful. Please, let's not do it. I was in favor of coming up with a project name for placement. It was discussed, and the decision was made not to do so. We have since moved forward with the outcome of that decision. Revisiting it now would be painful, as Chris notes, and do nothing to advance the progress we have been making. Let’s focus on the work in front of us, and not waste time revisiting past decisions. -- Ed Leafe __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: I wasn't in YVR, which explains why I's never heard of it. There's a number of misconceptions in the above document about the placement service that don't seem to have been addressed. I'm wondering if its worth revisiting the topic in Denver with the Cinder team or whether the Cinder team isn't interested in working with the placement service? It was also discussed as part of the reshaper spec and implemented for future use by a potential fast forward upgrade tool: http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/rocky/approved/reshape-provider-tree.html#direct-placement https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova/tree/nova/api/openstack/placement/direct.py I agree, talking to Cinder some more in denver about use of placement, either over HTTP or direct, whatever form, is good. But I don't think any of that should impact the naming situation. It's placement now, and placement is not really any less unique than a lot of the other words we use, the direct situation is a very special and edge case (likely in containers anyway, so naming not as much of a big deal). Changing the name, again, is painful. Please, let's not do it. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 01:17 PM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:01 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:59 PM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. What about placement direct and the effort to allow cinder to import placement instead of running it as a separate service? I don't know what placement direct is. Placement wasn't designed to be imported as a module. It was designed to be a (micro-)service with a REST API for interfacing. In Vancouver we talked about allowing cinder to import placement as a library. See https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-cinder-placement L47 I wasn't in YVR, which explains why I's never heard of it. There's a number of misconceptions in the above document about the placement service that don't seem to have been addressed. I'm wondering if its worth revisiting the topic in Denver with the Cinder team or whether the Cinder team isn't interested in working with the placement service? -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:01 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:59 PM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. What about placement direct and the effort to allow cinder to import placement instead of running it as a separate service? I don't know what placement direct is. Placement wasn't designed to be imported as a module. It was designed to be a (micro-)service with a REST API for interfacing. In Vancouver we talked about allowing cinder to import placement as a library. See https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-cinder-placement L47 Cheers, gibi Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 12:59 PM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. What about placement direct and the effort to allow cinder to import placement instead of running it as a separate service? I don't know what placement direct is. Placement wasn't designed to be imported as a module. It was designed to be a (micro-)service with a REST API for interfacing. Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. What about placement direct and the effort to allow cinder to import placement instead of running it as a separate service? Cheers, gibi Nothing is going to be adding openstack-placement into its requirements.txt file or doing: from placement import blah If some part of the server repo is meant to be imported into some other system, say nova, then it will be pulled into a separate lib, ala ironiclib or neutronlib. Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. Yes. If some part of the server repo is meant to be imported into some other system, say nova, then it will be pulled into a separate lib, ala ironiclib or neutronlib. Also yes. At this stage I _really_ don't want to go through the trouble of doing a second rename: we're in the process of finishing a rename now. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary. The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all. It's the placement server code. Nothing is going to be adding openstack-placement into its requirements.txt file or doing: from placement import blah If some part of the server repo is meant to be imported into some other system, say nova, then it will be pulled into a separate lib, ala ironiclib or neutronlib. Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400: > On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: > >> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: > >> > >>> Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package > >>> name? > >> > >> I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. > >> 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think > >> from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, > >> yeah? > > > > That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think > > the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed > > at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that > > top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. > > You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name > "placement"? > > The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like > os_placement instead? Yes. Doug __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name "placement"? The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like os_placement instead? Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 2018-09-04 11:44:41 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: [...] > > I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. > > 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think > > from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, > > yeah? > > That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think > the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed > at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that > top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. [...] Well, it goes further than just the local system. For example, if there was another project unrelated to OpenStack which also had a module named "placement" in the default import path, then Debian wouldn't be able to carry packages for both projects without modifying. At least one would need the module renamed or would need to put it in a private path and then any consumers would need to be adjusted to suit. -- Jeremy Stanley signature.asc Description: PGP signature __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100: > On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: > > > Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? > > I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. > 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think > from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, > yeah? That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I think the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used that top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is. > > Last I checked the concept of the package name is sort of put off > until we have passing tests, but we're nearly there on that. > __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 10:05:28 -0400: > On 09/04/2018 09:37 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > On 2018-09-04 09:32:20 +0100 (+0100), Chris Dent wrote: > > [...] > >> it allowed for the possibility that there could be another project > >> which provided the same service-type. That hasn't really come to > >> pass > > [...] > > > > It still might make sense to attempt to look at this issue from > > outside the limited scope of the OpenStack community. Is the > > expectation that the project when packaged (on PyPI, in Linux > > distributions and so on) will just be referred to as "placement" > > with no further context? > > I don't see any reason why the package name needs to be identical to the > repo name. > > Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? That would work fine. The package name is set in setup.cfg and we have several examples where the value there and repo name don't match. Doug > > Best, > -jay > __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote: Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that. 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff, yeah? Last I checked the concept of the package name is sort of put off until we have passing tests, but we're nearly there on that. -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement
On 09/04/2018 09:37 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2018-09-04 09:32:20 +0100 (+0100), Chris Dent wrote: [...] it allowed for the possibility that there could be another project which provided the same service-type. That hasn't really come to pass [...] It still might make sense to attempt to look at this issue from outside the limited scope of the OpenStack community. Is the expectation that the project when packaged (on PyPI, in Linux distributions and so on) will just be referred to as "placement" with no further context? I don't see any reason why the package name needs to be identical to the repo name. Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the package name? Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement (was:Nominating Chris Dent for placement-core)
On 2018-09-04 09:32:20 +0100 (+0100), Chris Dent wrote: [...] > it allowed for the possibility that there could be another project > which provided the same service-type. That hasn't really come to > pass [...] It still might make sense to attempt to look at this issue from outside the limited scope of the OpenStack community. Is the expectation that the project when packaged (on PyPI, in Linux distributions and so on) will just be referred to as "placement" with no further context? -- Jeremy Stanley signature.asc Description: PGP signature __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement (was:Nominating Chris Dent for placement-core)
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Thomas Goirand wrote: Just a nit-pick... It's a shame we call it just placement. It could have been something like: foo: OpenStack placement Just like we have: nova: OpenStack compute No? Is it too late? There was some discussion about this on one of the extraction-related etherpads [1] and the gist is that while it would be possible to change it, at this point "placement" is the name people use and are used to so there would have to be a very good reason to change it. All the docs and code talk about "placement", and python package names are already placement. It used to be the case that the service-oriented projects would have a project name different from their service-type because that was cool/fun [2] and it allowed for the possibility that there could be another project which provided the same service-type. That hasn't really come to pass and now that we are on the far side of the hype curve, doesn't really make much sense in terms of focusing energy. My feeling is that there is already a lot of identity associated with the term "placement" and changing it would be too disruptive. Also, I hope that it will operate as a constraint on feature creep. But if we were to change it, I vote for "katabatic", as a noun, even though it is an adjective. [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/placement-extract-stein-copy That was a copy of the original, which stopped working, but now that one has stopped working too. I'm going to attempt to reconstruct it today from copies that people. [2] For certain values of... -- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] better name for placement (was:Nominating Chris Dent for placement-core)
On 08/31/2018 05:45 PM, Eric Fried wrote: > The openstack/placement project [1] and its core team [2] have been > established in gerrit. > > I hereby nominate Chris Dent for membership in the placement-core team. > He has been instrumental in the design, implementation, and stewardship > of the placement API since its inception and has shown clear and > consistent leadership. > > As we are effectively bootstrapping placement-core at this time, it > would seem appropriate to consider +1/-1 responses from heavy placement > contributors as well as existing cores (currently nova-core). > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/projects/openstack/placement > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/1936,members Just a nit-pick... It's a shame we call it just placement. It could have been something like: foo: OpenStack placement Just like we have: nova: OpenStack compute No? Is it too late? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
