Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [testperf] unified tag/name for test and performance sub-group

2016-08-04 Thread Yujun Zhang
Hi, Mark Could you help update the working group link? https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing => https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testperf [image: Screen Shot 2016-08-05 at 1.40.21 PM.png] × On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:02 AM Gaoliang (kubi) wrote: > Sounds good J > > >

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Project Creation Review] Orchestra - Open Baton Integration with OPNFV

2016-08-04 Thread Raymond Paik
Ah never mind then :-) Thanks for the clarification Bin On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:35 PM, HU, BIN wrote: > Thanks Ray. > > > > This Orchestra was announced to tech-discuss mailing list on Monday > afternoon (August 1st). so based on the rule of 2-weeks, the earliest TSC >

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Project Creation Review] Orchestra - Open Baton Integration with OPNFV

2016-08-04 Thread HU, BIN
Thanks Ray. This Orchestra was announced to tech-discuss mailing list on Monday afternoon (August 1st). so based on the rule of 2-weeks, the earliest TSC date should be August 16th. Thanks Bin From: Raymond Paik [mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 9:30 PM To: HU,

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Project Creation Review] Orchestra - Open Baton Integration with OPNFV

2016-08-04 Thread Raymond Paik
Thanks Bin. It's been added to the TSC meeting agenda, but not 100% sure if we'll have time for 2 creation reviews (OPNFV-OPEN-O is the other proposal) On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 2:06 PM, HU, BIN wrote: > Hello TSC, > > > > We had a very good discussion on the project proposal

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [testperf] unified tag for test and performance sub group

2016-08-04 Thread Yujun Zhang
Dear testers, There seems to be many naming alias for test and perf group, e.g. https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/test I would like to propose a unified tag *[testperf]* for communication, especially in mailing list, so that we can filter the threads

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Orchestra] new project proposal

2016-08-04 Thread Liu Yuan
Hi Dave, In the proposal, the project name is OPNFV OPEN-O Requirement for Integration. And the repository name is Opera. Regards, Yuan Liu Yuan liuyuan_c...@hotmail.com From: Dave Neary Date: 2016-08-04 04:43 To: Liu

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [testperf] unified tag/name for test and performance sub-group

2016-08-04 Thread Yujun Zhang
Dear testers, There seems to be many naming alias for test and perf group, e.g. https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/test I would like to propose a unified tag *[testperf]* for communication, especially in mailing list, so that we can filter the threads

[opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: 答复: OPNFV [Dovetall] Meeting Summary

2016-08-04 Thread Lijun (Matthew)
Hi, Dave edited a draft there and used the wiki "share" botton to share to lots of people already, includes you :) here is the link https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Ipv6 best regards /MatthewLi -邮件原件- 发件人: Dave Neary [mailto:dne...@redhat.com] 发送时间: 2016年8月4日 23:20 收件人:

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Colorado release pipeline

2016-08-04 Thread David McBride
Uli, I looked at the page again and added some detail around the process for stable branch creation. Also, I noticed that you said that cherry-picking should be done from master to branch, but I think it's the other way around, isn't it? Bug fixes should be applied to the branch, then

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [IPv6] Project Meeting #45

2016-08-04 Thread HU, BIN
BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:REQUEST PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Pacific Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [Project Creation Review] Orchestra - Open Baton Integration with OPNFV

2016-08-04 Thread HU, BIN
Hello TSC, We had a very good discussion on the project proposal "Orchestra - Open Baton Integration with OPNFV" at the weekly technical meetings today. After the discussion today, the consensus is to request the Project Creation Review at the