On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 16:40 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 10/23/2018 1:41 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > > > Yeah, but part of the reason for placeholders was consistency > > > across all of > > > the services. I guess if there are never going to be upgrade > > > checks in > > > adjutant then I could see skipping it, but otherwise I would > > > prefer to at > > > least get the framework in place. > > > > > +1 > > > > Even if there is nothing to check at this point, I think having the > > facility > > there is a benefit for projects and scripts that are going to be > > consuming > > these checks. Having nothing to check, but having the status check > > there, is > > going to be better than everything needing to keep a list of which > > projects to > > run the checks on and which not. > > > > Sure, that works for me as well. I'm not against adding > placeholder/noop > checks knowing that nothing is immediately obvious to replace those > in > Stein, but could be done later when the opportunity arises. If it's > debatable on a per-project basis, then I'd defer to the core team > for > the project. >
+1 on what Ben, Matt, and Sean said there. __________________________________________________________________________ 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
