On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Michael Still <mi...@stillhq.com> wrote: > On 16 Jul 2016 1:27 PM, "Thomas Herve" <the...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Fox, Kevin M <kevin....@pnnl.gov> wrote: >> > The lack of Instance Users has caused lots of projects to try and work >> > around the lack thereof. I know for sure, Mangum, Heat, and Trove work >> > around the lack. I'm positive others have too. As an operator, it makes me >> > have to very carefully consider all the tradeoffs each project made, and >> > decide if I can accept the same risk they assumed. Since each is different, >> > thats much harder. >> >> Instance users would be nice. Nobody just provided a good solution. I >> know you tried, but I don't think you succeeded. We need a good >> implementation, easy to understand, and maybe this will move forward. > > I think I need a more complete definition of instance users to know what > you're talking about here. Is this the instance locking stuff Bruno proposed > a while ago?
I believe this is what's Kevin talks about: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/222293/ -- Thomas __________________________________________________________________________ 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
