On Jul 10, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Zane Bitter
wrote:
> On 10/07/14 05:34, Steven Hardy wrote:
> >The other approach is to set up a new container, owned by the user,
> >every time. In that case, a provider selecting this implementation
> >would need to make it clear to customers if th
On 10/07/14 05:34, Steven Hardy wrote:
> >The other approach is to set up a new container, owned by the user, every
time. In that case, a provider selecting this implementation would need to make it
clear to customers if they would be billed for a WaitCondition resource. I'd prefer
to avoid th
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 10:33:26PM +, Randall Burt wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Zane Bitter
> wrote:
> > On 08/07/14 17:17, Steven Hardy wrote:
> >
> >> Regarding forcing deployers to make a one-time decision, I have a question
> >> re cost (money and performance) of the Swift approa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>>>
>> I wouldn't call our resources "vast".
>
> I count 73 in your patch, not including contrib and assuming you didn't miss
> any ;). It's seems
> clear to me that we're well past the point of what the Extensions API was
> designed for. When
> e
On 09/07/14 18:33, Randall Burt wrote:
On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Zane Bitter
wrote:
On 08/07/14 17:17, Steven Hardy wrote:
Regarding forcing deployers to make a one-time decision, I have a question
re cost (money and performance) of the Swift approach vs just hitting the
Heat API
- If fo
Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2014-07-09 15:33:26 -0700:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Zane Bitter
> wrote:
> > On 08/07/14 17:17, Steven Hardy wrote:
> >
> >> Regarding forcing deployers to make a one-time decision, I have a question
> >> re cost (money and performance) of the Swift a
On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Zane Bitter
wrote:
> On 08/07/14 17:17, Steven Hardy wrote:
>
>> Regarding forcing deployers to make a one-time decision, I have a question
>> re cost (money and performance) of the Swift approach vs just hitting the
>> Heat API
>>
>> - If folks use the Swift resourc
On 09/07/14 17:10, Angus Salkeld wrote:
If we could make them separate Python packages within a single Git repo,
>I would be +2 on that. I don't know if that's feasible with our current
>tooling (though I guess it's not dissimilar to what you're doing with
>the contrib stuff in this patch series?
On 08/07/14 17:17, Steven Hardy wrote:
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 03:08:32PM -0400, Zane Bitter wrote:
I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is great
and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus & Steve B
for implementing it.
Now that we have done t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/07/14 11:03, Randall Burt wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 3:15 PM, Zane Bitter
> wrote:
>
>> On 08/07/14 17:13, Angus Salkeld wrote:
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 08/07/14 09:14, Zane Bitter wrote:
I see tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/07/14 10:17, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 08/07/14 17:13, Angus Salkeld wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/07/14 09:14, Zane Bitter wrote:
>>> I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
>
On Jul 9, 2014, at 3:15 PM, Zane Bitter
wrote:
> On 08/07/14 17:13, Angus Salkeld wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/07/14 09:14, Zane Bitter wrote:
>>> I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
>>> great and IMO absolutely the ri
I think my reply to Angus covers most of your points, except this one:
On 08/07/14 17:39, Steve Baker wrote:
On 09/07/14 07:08, Zane Bitter wrote:
Constraints, I feel, are very similar to resources in this respect. I
am less concerned about template formats, since there are so few of
them... al
On 08/07/14 17:13, Angus Salkeld wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/07/14 09:14, Zane Bitter wrote:
I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
great and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus &
Steve B for implementing it.
On 09/07/14 07:08, Zane Bitter wrote:
> I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
> great and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus
> & Steve B for implementing it.
>
> Now that we have done that work, I think there are more places we can
> take ad
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 03:08:32PM -0400, Zane Bitter wrote:
> I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is great
> and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus & Steve B
> for implementing it.
>
> Now that we have done that work, I think there are more
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/07/14 09:14, Zane Bitter wrote:
> I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
> great and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus &
> Steve B for implementing it.
>
> Now that we have done that wo
I see that the new client plugins are loaded using stevedore, which is
great and IMO absolutely the right tool for that job. Thanks to Angus &
Steve B for implementing it.
Now that we have done that work, I think there are more places we can
take advantage of it too - for example, we currently
18 matches
Mail list logo
