Definitely, true for community branch. +1 of documenting known issues both in code and on wiki (or whatever is appropriate place)
From: crowbar-bounces On Behalf Of Judd Maltin Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 7:40 AM To: crowbar Subject: Re: [Crowbar] Do we want to support glance & swift without keystone? On Jun 14, 2013 8:35 AM, "Vincent Untz" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Le jeudi 13 juin 2013, à 13:58 -0400, Judd Maltin a écrit : > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:51 PM, > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Generally, I like to focus on what we are testing and be very specific > > > about > > > that as a know "path to success" and then not prevent other paths unless > > > they are known to cause harm. > > > > Depends on your definition of harm. I forsee a few support pings. > > Nothing I wouldn't embrace handling, to further evangelize. :-) > > > > Vincent? > > For me, it's rather clear: if we get support pings, then it means we > caused harm :-) > > Vincent > We've been using the terms "happy path" and "other paths." The happy path should be obvious and well groomed. Other paths should bear warnings, but not barriers. I'd like to setup a policy about that and start documenting them. I don't want to lock out more sophisticated users. Anyone wanna chime in?
_______________________________________________ Crowbar mailing list [email protected] https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
