IIRC in this thread we agreed to use separate core groups for different repositories http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/055111.html <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-January/055111.html> Why not follow that approach in this case?
> 27 бер. 2015 о 09:01 Przemyslaw Kaminski <pkamin...@mirantis.com> написав(ла): > > Sorry, I meant > > [2] https://github.com/CGenie/fuel-utils/ > > P. > > On 03/27/2015 08:34 AM, Przemyslaw Kaminski wrote: >> Hello, >> >> In accordance with the consensus that was reached on the ML I've set up >> the fuel-dev-tools repository [1]. It will be the target repo to merge >> my 2 private repos [2] and [3] (I don't think it's necessary to set up 2 >> different repos for this now). The core reviewers are the fuel-core >> group. I needed core permissions to set things up and merged a >> Cookiecutter patchset [4] to test things. After that I revoked my core >> permissions leaving only the fuel-core team. >> >> P. >> >> [1] https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-dev-tools >> [2] https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-dev-tools >> [3] https://github.com/CGenie/vagrant-fuel-dev >> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/167968/ >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
