In all honesty it doesn't matter which term we go with. As long as we are
consistent and define the meaning. I think we can argue intuitive vs
non-intuitive in this case unto the ground. I prefer "project" to tenant,
but beyond being a bit of an "overloaded" term, I really don't think anyone
wil
I have seen several people request that their users be members of two
"projects" and that they be allow to publish objects that are "Shared" by
multiple "projects".
For some reason the people who request these complex data constructions
always prefer to call the enclosing entity a "project". I
On Saturday, November 23, 2013 3:28:28 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
Cool; also, if it's not, we should add that as an official tag so that
it type-completes in LP.
On 24 November 2013 10:21, Matt Riedemann wrote:
Going through nova bug triage today I noticed a pretty straight-forward
untagged b
> On Nov 23, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>
> Ok, so no - diskimage-builder builds regular OpenStack full disk disk images.
>
> Translating that to a filesystem is easy; doing a diff against another
> filesystem version is also doable, and if the container service for
> Nova underst
Ok, so no - diskimage-builder builds regular OpenStack full disk disk images.
Translating that to a filesystem is easy; doing a diff against another
filesystem version is also doable, and if the container service for
Nova understands such partial container contents you could certainly
glue it all
On Nov 23, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Robert Collins
wrote:
> On 24 November 2013 05:42, Clayton Coleman wrote:
>
>>> Containers will work fine in diskimage-builder. One only needs to hack
>>> in the ability to save in the container image format rather than qcow2.
>>
>> That's good to know. Will dis
On 11/22/2013 01:49 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 11:04 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Russell Bryant wrote:
[...]
I'm not thrilled about the prospect of this going into a new project for
multiple reasons.
- Given the priority and how long this has been dragging out, having
On 24 November 2013 05:42, Clayton Coleman wrote:
>> Containers will work fine in diskimage-builder. One only needs to hack
>> in the ability to save in the container image format rather than qcow2.
>
> That's good to know. Will diskimage-builder be able to break those down into
> multiple laye
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Caitlin Bestler <
caitlin.best...@nexenta.com> wrote:
>
>
> On November 23, 2013 4:09:49 AM Christopher Yeoh
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> So in the past we've used both tenant and project to refer to the same
>> thing and I think its been a source of confusion for peop
On 23 November 2013 05:32, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:24:18AM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote:
>> A good example is the current discussion around a new scheduling
>> service. There have been lots of big ideas around this. Robert Collins
>> just started a thread about a pr
Cool; also, if it's not, we should add that as an official tag so that
it type-completes in LP.
On 24 November 2013 10:21, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> Going through nova bug triage today I noticed a pretty straight-forward
> untagged bug for docker but then noticed we didn't have a docker tag in our
Going through nova bug triage today I noticed a pretty straight-forward
untagged bug for docker but then noticed we didn't have a docker tag in
our bug tag table [1]. I went ahead and added one and the queries show
a decent number of results, so people were already using the tag.
The question
On November 23, 2013 4:09:49 AM Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Hi,
So in the past we've used both tenant and project to refer to the same
thing and I think its been a source of confusion for people new to
OpenStack. In the Nova code we use both, but at least for the API we've
been trying to consiste
To be clear, I don't care Tenant vs Project. However, I do care that we should
not continue this confusion.
One or the other... but not both and a plan to depreciate the other. Naturally,
at least 1 release backwards compatibility for environment variables or APIs.
Tim
From: Dean Troyer [mail
sent on the go
On Nov 23, 2013 9:02 AM, "Davanum Srinivas" wrote:
>
> Gary,
>
> There's a blow-by-blow account in this etherpad -
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/critical-patches-gatecrash-November-2013
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Gary Kotton wrote:
> > Hi,
> > To whoever fixed the g
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
> +1 for using the term "project" across all services. Projects provide
> multi-tenant isolation for resources across the cloud. Part of the reason
> we prefer "projects" in keystone is that "domains" conceptually provide
> multi-tenant isolat
+1 for using the term "project" across all services. Projects provide
multi-tenant isolation for resources across the cloud. Part of the reason
we prefer "projects" in keystone is that "domains" conceptually provide
multi-tenant isolation within keystone itself, so the overloaded "tenant"
terminolo
On 11/23/2013 08:28 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
>
> Horizon uses Project in the user interface, yet the openstack.rc file
> contains tenant_id and tenant_name. It makes it very difficult to write user
> guides given that such a fundamental concept has two names.
+1. I struggled with this dual-nomencla
Gary,
There's a blow-by-blow account in this etherpad -
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/critical-patches-gatecrash-November-2013
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Gary Kotton wrote:
> Hi,
> To whoever fixed the gate – Thanks! Can someone please let us know what the
> problems were.
> Thanks
> G
Thanks for the reminder, Sandy.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo/+bug/1254300
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Sandy Walsh wrote:
> Seeing this thread reminded me:
>
> We need support in the update script for entry points in olso setup.cfg to
> make their way into the target project.
>
> So, if
> On Nov 23, 2013, at 2:37 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Clayton Coleman's message of 2013-11-22 21:43:40 -0800:
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2013, at 9:54 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 11/22/2013 11:34 AM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
I have updated the language pack (name su
Horizon uses Project in the user interface, yet the openstack.rc file contains
tenant_id and tenant_name. It makes it very difficult to write user guides
given that such a fundamental concept has two names.
No problem to maintain compatibility (i.e. try OS_TENANT_NAME after
OS_PROJECT_NAME) bu
Hi,
To whoever fixed the gate – Thanks! Can someone please let us know what the
problems were.
Thanks
Gary
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
On 11/22/13 2:47 PM, "Daniel P. Berrange" wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:25:51AM +, John Garbutt wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Russell Bryant
>>wrote:
>> In particular, has there been a decision made about whether it will
>> definitely be deprecated in some (a
+1
On 11/23/13 4:53 PM, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>+1 would be happy to have Matt on the team
>
>On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Brian Elliott
>wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Solid reviewer!
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> I would lik
+1 would be happy to have Matt on the team
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Brian Elliott wrote:
> +1
>
> Solid reviewer!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Nov 22, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I would like to propose adding Matt Riedemann to the nova-core review tea
Seeing this thread reminded me:
We need support in the update script for entry points in olso setup.cfg to make
their way into the target project.
So, if update is getting some love, please keep that in mind.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-
Project is what Keystone chose to standardize on for their v3 API. Lots of
other APIs are affected as you can imagine.
Here's a thread http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/wyce6kvkfqexcpuu
Anne
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Nick Chase wrote:
> From a purely documentation and explanatory st
>From a purely documentation and explanatory standpoint I vote for
"project", if we're going to standardize on one or the other.
On Nov 23, 2013 7:13 AM, "Christopher Yeoh" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So in the past we've used both tenant and project to refer to the same
> thing and I think its been a sourc
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 11:41:16 +
John Garbutt wrote:
> On 19 November 2013 11:40, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
> > I've updated the Nova review check list with some details for
> > reviewing V3 API changesets and started a bit of a style guide for
> > the API.
> >
> > Checklist:
> > https://wiki.ope
Hi,
So in the past we've used both tenant and project to refer to the same
thing and I think its been a source of confusion for people new to
OpenStack. In the Nova code we use both, but at least for the API we've
been trying to consistently present to the client tenant (which is the
majority usag
31 matches
Mail list logo
