Top posting the relevant review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161946/
Everett
On Feb 13, 2015, at 8:44 AM, michael mccune
m...@redhat.commailto:m...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/12/2015 02:20 PM, Ryan Brown wrote:
+1 I think the way to go would be:
We suggest (pretty please) that you comply
On 02/12/2015 02:20 PM, Ryan Brown wrote:
+1 I think the way to go would be:
We suggest (pretty please) that you comply with RFCs 7230-5 and if you
have any questions ask us. Also here are some examples of usage that
is/isn't RFC compliant for clarity
+1, i like the idea of pointing readers
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Ian Cordasco wrote:
So that particular problem you mention is an issue with the Routes
package. It assumes you will define very (method, route) that you wish to
handle and it’ll 404 everything else (because no definition was found). If
we used better (slightly higher level)
I meant to get to this in today's meeting[1] but we ran out of time
and based on the rest of the conversation it was likely to lead to a
spiral of different interpretations, so I thought I'd put it up here.
$SUBJECT says it all: When writing guidelines to what extent do we
think we should be
On 02/12/2015 01:08 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 02/12/2015 01:01 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
I meant to get to this in today's meeting[1] but we ran out of time
and based on the rest of the conversation it was likely to lead to a
spiral of different interpretations, so I thought I'd put it up here.
On 02/12/2015 01:01 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
I meant to get to this in today's meeting[1] but we ran out of time
and based on the rest of the conversation it was likely to lead to a
spiral of different interpretations, so I thought I'd put it up here.
$SUBJECT says it all: When writing guidelines
On 2/12/15, 12:01, Chris Dent chd...@redhat.com wrote:
I meant to get to this in today's meeting[1] but we ran out of time
and based on the rest of the conversation it was likely to lead to a
spiral of different interpretations, so I thought I'd put it up here.
$SUBJECT says it all: When
