On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:15:03AM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > Also, thank you for registering a blueprint. To get the code merged into
> > Quantum, you will need to propose a diff for review following the standard
> > OpenStack development process (see:
> > http://wiki.openstack.org/GerritW
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 09:13:33AM -0800, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> [ narrowing scope to netstack list, as there are more design discussion ]
>
> Hi Yamahata,
Hi.
> Since Essex-3 is now near, I wanted to touch based with you again about this.
>
> With respect to your thoughts below about "driver
So, while looking at this, I discovered the file you guys have,
version.py. I've been working on a standalone library, vcsversion
(https://github.com/emonty/vcsversion) which does some similar things
and which encapsulates some of the logic that's current in the
build_tarball.sh script. I'd love to
Yup. I will set things up - I might even get crazy and do some of the
follow up work for you. :)
Thanks guys!
Monty
On 01/10/2012 02:48 PM, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Ok, based on the meeting today we are going ahead with this.
>
> Blueprint created and assigned to
> monty: https://blueprints.launc
Ok, based on the meeting today we are going ahead with this.
Blueprint created and assigned to monty:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/separate-client-repo
Monty, I assume that you will setup the infrastructure, then at some point
need to hand off to a quantum dev (or not). Please
Ok, so my current status on this is that I'm a big proponent of the idea
and am happy to make suggestions on Quantum code for openstack-common, but
I sadly don't have resources to help.
So I guess I'll just hope for a note from you folks at some point that if
you make progress and think there is c
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:33 AM, Salvatore Orlando <
salvatore.orla...@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here’s another “resurrecting” email thread, after exactly a month!
>
just in time! everyone knows that email thread expire after one month.
I agre with your thoughts below and don't real
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 10:50 -0800, Monty Taylor wrote:
> Great list.
>
> For quantum/common/test_lib.py, I've been working with Jason Kölker to
> get nova to be able to use nose directly without run_tests.py. To that
> end, he's written openstack-nose. I'd love it if we could get quantum to
> use
Great list.
For quantum/common/test_lib.py, I've been working with Jason Kölker to
get nova to be able to use nose directly without run_tests.py. To that
end, he's written openstack-nose. I'd love it if we could get quantum to
use that as well instead of test_lib.py.
(ultimate goal is that we run
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 6:29 AM, Salvatore Orlando <
salvatore.orla...@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> Ideally I would choose the 2nd route as well.
>
> However, this kind of reminds me of the discussions we were having at the
> design summit over whether we should rely on a new service/extension of th
Hi folks, I have done a once-over on the code and identified a lot of code
that I think would fit well in openstack-common.
I updated: http://wiki.openstack.org/QuantumOpenstackCommon
In most cases this is code we borrowed directly from another project (nova
or glance) to get our basic web servic
[ narrowing scope to netstack list, as there are more design discussion ]
Hi Yamahata,
Since Essex-3 is now near, I wanted to touch based with you again about
this.
With respect to your thoughts below about "driver-specific" configuration.
I think it is fine for your code to store configuration
Hi folks,
As many of you probably noticed, I did a sweep of all open bugs last night.
I'm trying eliminate any invalid bugs, as well as highlight any bugs that
should be higher priority. Once we get responses to a few more bugs, I'll
send out a list that might be a good candidates for anyone loo
13 matches
Mail list logo
