e-
>> From: Michał Jastrzębski
>> Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>
>> Date: January 24, 2017 at 11:01:14
>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc
ing List (not for usage questions)
>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A new kolla-salt deliverable
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We've reached our agreement!
> > http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_28264d5a40d0088c
> > New deli
-Original Message-
From: Michał Jastrzębski
Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Date: January 24, 2017 at 11:01:14
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A new kolla-salt
Hello everyone,
We've reached our agreement!
http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_28264d5a40d0088c
New deliverable process will be lightweight - just normal +2+2+PTL
vote is needed to add new deliverable. I'm going to create new
deliverables.yaml file in Kolla repository which will a
Our voting ends in 2 days, but it's more about process how to include
code rather than if Kolla-salt stays. Kolla-salt resonates with Kolla
mission very well, whether it's under Kolla umbrella or outside of it,
I don't think anybody will block it:)
Bottom line - if there will be people working on
So what the conclusion with kolla-salt deliverable, has this work started,
if yes where is the code etc etc ?
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Thierry Carrez
wrote:
> Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> > I agree this would make good PTG discussion for us, and maybe someone
> > from TC could join in. We
Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> I agree this would make good PTG discussion for us, and maybe someone
> from TC could join in. We are somehow special beast as Kolla itself is
> just meant to be consumed. Kolla to me is similar to Oslo in that
> matter. But still we don't have oslo-compute projects, we
e
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Steven Dake (stdake)"
> Date: Friday, December 23, 2016 at 3:53 PM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A
-steve
-Original Message-
From: "Steven Dake (stdake)"
Date: Friday, December 23, 2016 at 3:53 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A new kolla-salt deliverable
-
From: "Steven Dake (stdake)"
Date: Friday, December 23, 2016 at 3:53 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A new kolla-salt deliverable
WFM – I’d be partly in favor of such an approach althou
-
From: Michał Jastrzębski
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Date: Friday, December 23, 2016 at 3:38 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] Re: [kolla] A new kolla-salt
So I agree with you that we need policy established here. What I'm
getting at - which core teams will vote on inclusion of new
deliverable? All of them? Just Kolla? This is grey area I'm referring
to. What's kolla-k8s core team's business if somebody would like to
add saltstack support? What I woul
Michal,
Really what I was getting at was placing in the governance repository as a
kolla deliverable. In days past we *always* voted on additions and removals of
deliverables. It doesn’t seem like a gray area to me – we have always followed
a voting pattern for adding and removal of deliverab
13 matches
Mail list logo
