I favor the second option for the same reasons as Zane described, but also
don't think we need a LaunchConfiguration resource. How about just adding a
attribute to the resources such that the engine knows is not meant to be
handled in the usual way, and instead it is really a template (sorry
On 30/01/14 12:20, Randall Burt wrote:
On Jan 30, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Clint Byrumcl...@fewbar.com
wrote:
I would hope we would solve that at a deeper level, rather than making
resources for the things we think will need re-use. I think nested stacks
allow this level of re-use
Hi Thomas,
I haven't looked at the details of the autoscaling design for a while, but
the first option looks more intuitive to me.
It seems to cover the same content as LaunchConfiguration, but is it
generic and therefore would provide for one common approach for all kinds
of resources.
Regards,
Excerpts from Thomas Herve's message of 2014-01-30 03:01:38 -0800:
Hi all,
While talking to Zane yesterday, he raised an interesting question about
whether or not we want to keep a LaunchConfiguration object for the native
autoscaling resources.
The LaunchConfiguration object basically
On 30/01/14 06:01, Thomas Herve wrote:
Hi all,
While talking to Zane yesterday, he raised an interesting question about
whether or not we want to keep a LaunchConfiguration object for the native
autoscaling resources.
The LaunchConfiguration object basically holds properties to be able to
: Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
Date: 01/30/2014 09:43 AM
Subject:Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] About LaunchConfiguration and
Autoscaling
On 30/01/14 06:01, Thomas Herve wrote:
Hi all,
While talking to Zane yesterday, he raised
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2014-01-30 07:38:38 -0800:
On 30/01/14 06:01, Thomas Herve wrote:
Hi all,
While talking to Zane yesterday, he raised an interesting question about
whether or not we want to keep a LaunchConfiguration object for the native
autoscaling resources.
On Jan 30, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com
wrote:
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2014-01-30 07:38:38 -0800:
On 30/01/14 06:01, Thomas Herve wrote:
Hi all,
While talking to Zane yesterday, he raised an interesting question about
whether or not we want to keep a
and more verbose.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Clint Byrum [cl...@fewbar.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 9:09 AM
To: openstack-dev
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] About LaunchConfiguration and Autoscaling
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2014-01-30 07:38:38
On 30/01/14 12:20, Randall Burt wrote:
On Jan 30, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Clint Byrumcl...@fewbar.com
wrote:
I would hope we would solve that at a deeper level, rather than making
resources for the things we think will need re-use. I think nested stacks
allow this level of re-use already anyway.
10 matches
Mail list logo
