On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Adam Young wrote:
> On 01/06/2014 01:10 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>
>> On 2014-01-06 10:19:39 -0500 (-0500), Adam Young wrote:
>>
>>> If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we
>>> would have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that
On 01/06/2014 01:10 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2014-01-06 10:19:39 -0500 (-0500), Adam Young wrote:
If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we
would have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that by
now.
[...]
With the lack of In-Reply-To header and not finding
On 2014-01-06 10:19:39 -0500 (-0500), Adam Young wrote:
> If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we
> would have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that by
> now.
[...]
With the lack of In-Reply-To header and not finding any previous
messages to the list in the pas
+1, looks like a good idea
- Original Message -
From: "Jay Pipes"
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 5:29:49 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Keystone Hashing MD5 to SHA256
On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 17:00 +0100, Tristan Cacqueray wrote:
> On 01/
On 01/06/2014 04:19 PM, Adam Young wrote:
> Dirk,
>
> If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we would
> have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that by now.
>
> Here is the deal: We need to be able to make things work side by side.
> Not sure how to do that, bu
On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 17:00 +0100, Tristan Cacqueray wrote:
> On 01/06/2014 04:19 PM, Adam Young wrote:
> > Dirk,
> >
> > If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we would
> > have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that by now.
> >
> > Here is the deal: We need t
Dirk,
If it were as easy as just replaceing hteh hash algorithm, we would
have done it a year + ago. I'm guessing you figured that by now.
Here is the deal: We need to be able to make things work side by side.
Not sure how to do that, but I think the right solution is to make
keystone co
