Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] RFC - using Gerrit for Nova Blueprint review approval

2014-03-06 Thread Matt Van Winkle
Hey Sean, The number one item that came out of the Operator's mini summit on Monday was better mechanisms to engage Operators in the design and review process. Moving Blueprints to Gerrit was something discussed quite a bit. It's fantastic to hear the same thing is coming from the Nova

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Updates to Juno blueprint review process

2014-03-21 Thread Matt Van Winkle
From: Kyle Mestery mest...@noironetworks.commailto:mest...@noironetworks.com Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: Friday, March 21, 2014 2:49 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing

Re: [openstack-dev] Operators Design Summit ideas for Atlanta

2014-04-01 Thread Matt Van Winkle
So, I've been watching the etherpad and the summit submissions and I noticed that there isn't anything for nova. Maybe I'm off base, but it seems like we'd be missing the mark to not have a Developer/Operator's exchange on the key product. Is there anything we can do to get a session slotted

Re: [openstack-dev] Operators Design Summit ideas for Atlanta

2014-04-07 Thread Matt Van Winkle
:44, Matt Van Winkle wrote: So, I've been watching the etherpad and the summit submissions and I noticed that there isn't anything for nova. Maybe I'm off base, but it seems like we'd be missing the mark to not have a Developer/Operator's exchange on the key product. Is there anything we can

Re: [openstack-dev] Operators Design Summit ideas for Atlanta

2014-04-08 Thread Matt Van Winkle
It would be incredibly useful to get some of the packagers into this conversation too. Matt On 4/8/14 4:51 AM, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 08:24:00AM -0500, Dolph Mathews wrote: On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Adam Young ayo...@redhat.com wrote: On

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Thoughts from the PTL

2014-04-14 Thread Matt Van Winkle
On 4/13/14 11:58 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote: * specs review. The new blueprint process is a work of genius, and I think its already working better than what we've had in previous releases. However, there are a lot of blueprints there in review, and we need to focus on making sure

Re: [openstack-dev] nova-specs

2014-04-15 Thread Matt Van Winkle
Exactly. Even if operators/users only comment with a +0, it's already flushed out a lot of good details on several blueprints. Thanks! Matt On 4/15/14 2:38 PM, Tim Bell tim.b...@cern.ch wrote: +2 I think that there is also a need to verify the user story aspect. One of the great things with

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] nova-specs

2014-04-16 Thread Matt Van Winkle
On 4/16/14 10:00 AM, Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote: Remember that just because someone -1s a patch, doesn't mean that every single comment they made was -1 worthy on its own. Often times I will -1 for a spelling mistake and then make a bunch of other purely-opinion comments which don't

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Should we add instance action event to live migration?

2015-06-12 Thread Matt Van Winkle
On 6/12/15 7:46 AM, Andrew Laski and...@lascii.com wrote: On 06/11/15 at 06:54pm, Ian Wells wrote: On 11 June 2015 at 12:37, Richard Raseley rich...@raseley.com wrote: Andrew Laski wrote: There are many reasons a deployer may want to live-migrate instances around: capacity planning,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Large Deployments Team][Performance Team] New informal working group suggestion

2015-09-22 Thread Matt Van Winkle
Thanks, Dina! For context to the rest of the LDT folks, Dina reached out to me about working on this under our umbrella for now. It made sense until we understand if it's a large enough thing to live as its own working group because most of us have various performance concerns too. So, like