On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 07:56:26AM -0700, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 2/6/2016 7:54 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> >To remove the devstack workaround [1] we have to create a stable/kilo
> >branch for os-testr (from the 0.6.0 tag probably since that's what's
> >currently being used in kilo jobs), sync
On 2/6/2016 7:54 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 2/5/2016 11:01 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On February 6, 2016 4:29:34 PM GMT+11:00, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
On 2/4/2016 11:23 PM, Tony Breeds wrote:
Hi All,
Just a quick heads up that the kilo gate (and therefore anything
that
relie
On 2/5/2016 11:01 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On February 6, 2016 4:29:34 PM GMT+11:00, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
On 2/4/2016 11:23 PM, Tony Breeds wrote:
Hi All,
Just a quick heads up that the kilo gate (and therefore anything
that
relies on kilo)[1] is a little busted.
This was o
On February 6, 2016 4:29:34 PM GMT+11:00, Matt Riedemann
wrote:
>
>
>On 2/4/2016 11:23 PM, Tony Breeds wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> Just a quick heads up that the kilo gate (and therefore anything
>that
>> relies on kilo)[1] is a little busted.
>>
>> This was originally noticed in 1541879[2] and a
On 2/4/2016 11:23 PM, Tony Breeds wrote:
Hi All,
Just a quick heads up that the kilo gate (and therefore anything that
relies on kilo)[1] is a little busted.
This was originally noticed in 1541879[2] and a quick cap for g-r was proposed,
however if my analysis is correct this can't land b
Hi All,
Just a quick heads up that the kilo gate (and therefore anything that
relies on kilo)[1] is a little busted.
This was originally noticed in 1541879[2] and a quick cap for g-r was proposed,
however if my analysis is correct this can't land because of 1542164[3].
testtools 2.0.0 was rel
