[opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting

2016-08-10 Thread Tianhongbo 
Hi Chris:

Yes, we agreed to use the opnfv-meeting.
But now, there is a requirements that all people like to talk in the IRC all 
time for dovetail like done in the releng or yardstick.
If we use opnfv-meeting, we cannot do that.
That is the problem.

Best Regards

hongbo

发件人: Christopher Price [mailto:chrispric...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2016年8月10日 18:34
收件人: Tianhongbo; Christopher Price; Dave Neary; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
主题: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for 
the dovetail meeting

Hi Hongbo,

If I recall, there were comments on the last meeting that people preferred to 
use opnfv-meeting.  I had not heard anyone speak to the desire to create 
another IRC channel for this meeting series.

My only thought is that it seems unnecessary to create another channel, our 
committers indicated a desire to stay on opnfv-meeting and it is unclear why 
this has come up again.

/ Chris

From: 
mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>>
 on behalf of Tianhongbo 
mailto:hongbo.tianhon...@huawei.com>>
Date: Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 03:02
To: Christopher Price 
mailto:christopher.pr...@ericsson.com>>, Dave 
Neary mailto:dne...@redhat.com>>, TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for 
the dovetail meeting

Hi all:

With the development of dovetail, there are more people involved in.
we used the opnfv-meeting before.
In order to help people to discuss whenever and wherever, I suggest to use the 
#opnfv-dovetail for dovetail discussion.
If we have dovetail own IRC, it can avoid the conflict.
We tested it, it works.

Any comments?

Best Regards

hongbo
___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting

2016-08-10 Thread Christopher Price 
Ok, interesting no-one mentioned that on the last meeting.  

 

Can we discuss it as a group on Friday before changing what was agreed 5 days 
ago?  

(Note: releng did create it’s own channel but no longer uses it, rather they 
work on community channels as separate channels are at times not very useful 
for collaborative activities.)

 

/ Chris

 

 

From: Tianhongbo 
Date: Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 13:53
To: Christopher Price , Christopher Price 
, Dave Neary , TECH-DISCUSS 
OPNFV 
Subject: 答复: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail 
for the dovetail meeting

 

Hi Chris:

 

Yes, we agreed to use the opnfv-meeting.

But now, there is a requirements that all people like to talk in the IRC all 
time for dovetail like done in the releng or yardstick.

If we use opnfv-meeting, we cannot do that.

That is the problem.

 

Best Regards

 

hongbo

 

发件人: Christopher Price [mailto:chrispric...@gmail.com] 
发送时间: 2016年8月10日 18:34
收件人: Tianhongbo; Christopher Price; Dave Neary; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
主题: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for 
the dovetail meeting

 

Hi Hongbo,

 

If I recall, there were comments on the last meeting that people preferred to 
use opnfv-meeting.  I had not heard anyone speak to the desire to create 
another IRC channel for this meeting series.

 

My only thought is that it seems unnecessary to create another channel, our 
committers indicated a desire to stay on opnfv-meeting and it is unclear why 
this has come up again.

 

/ Chris

 

From:  on behalf of Tianhongbo 

Date: Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 03:02
To: Christopher Price , Dave Neary 
, TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for 
the dovetail meeting

 

Hi all:

 

With the development of dovetail, there are more people involved in. 

we used the opnfv-meeting before.

In order to help people to discuss whenever and wherever, I suggest to use the 
#opnfv-dovetail for dovetail discussion.

If we have dovetail own IRC, it can avoid the conflict.

We tested it, it works.

 

Any comments?

 

Best Regards

 

hongbo

___ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss 

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting

2016-08-10 Thread Dave Neary 
Hi,

I agree with Chris.

There is also a very well suited channel for general discussion, not
limited to Dovetail, #opnfv - I propose we use that if there are topics
that need real-time interaction. Also, please remember the old Apache
dictum: "If it didn't happen on the mailing list, it didn't happen".
Nowadays, we would probably extend that to "if it didn't happen on the
mailing list, on Jira, on Gerrit, or in the wiki, it didn't happen, but
you get the point - it's important that real-time discussions are
brought back to an asynchronous, archived forum.

Thanks,
Dave.
On 08/10/2016 08:25 AM, Christopher Price wrote:
> Ok, interesting no-one mentioned that on the last meeting. 
> 
>  
> 
> Can we discuss it as a group on Friday before changing what was agreed 5
> days ago? 
> 
> (Note: releng did create it’s own channel but no longer uses it, rather
> they work on community channels as separate channels are at times not
> very useful for collaborative activities.)
> 
>  
> 
> / Chris
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> *From: *Tianhongbo 
> *Date: *Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 13:53
> *To: *Christopher Price , Christopher Price
> , Dave Neary ,
> TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
> *Subject: *答复: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
>  
> 
> Hi Chris:
> 
>  
> 
> Yes, we agreed to use the opnfv-meeting.
> 
> But now, there is a requirements that all people like to talk in the IRC
> all time for dovetail like done in the releng or yardstick.
> 
> If we use opnfv-meeting, we cannot do that.
> 
> That is the problem.
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards
> 
>  
> 
> hongbo
> 
>  
> 
> *发件人**:*Christopher Price [mailto:chrispric...@gmail.com]
> *发送时间:* 2016年8月10日 18:34
> *收件人:* Tianhongbo; Christopher Price; Dave Neary; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
> *主题:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
>  
> 
> Hi Hongbo,
> 
>  
> 
> If I recall, there were comments on the last meeting that people
> preferred to use opnfv-meeting.  I had not heard anyone speak to the
> desire to create another IRC channel for this meeting series.
> 
>  
> 
> My only thought is that it seems unnecessary to create another channel,
> our committers indicated a desire to stay on opnfv-meeting and it is
> unclear why this has come up again.
> 
>  
> 
> / Chris
> 
>  
> 
> *From: * > on behalf of
> Tianhongbo  >
> *Date: *Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 03:02
> *To: *Christopher Price  >, Dave Neary  >, TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
>  >
> *Subject: *[opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
>  
> 
> Hi all:
> 
>  
> 
> With the development of dovetail, there are more people involved in.
> 
> we used the opnfv-meeting before.
> 
> In order to help people to discuss whenever and wherever, I suggest to
> use the #opnfv-dovetail for dovetail discussion.
> 
> If we have dovetail own IRC, it can avoid the conflict.
> 
> We tested it, it works.
> 
>  
> 
> Any comments?
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards
> 
>  
> 
> hongbo
> 
> ___ opnfv-tech-discuss
> mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
> 

-- 
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: [dovetail]suggest to use the #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting

2016-08-10 Thread SULLIVAN, BRYAN L 
I support fewer distinct channels also. If it turns out we have an adhoc 
meeting conflict, we can setup #opnfv-alt1/2/3 ala OpenStack, ping others and 
move conversations there as needed. Just like CB radio.

On Aug 10, 2016, at 8:54 AM, Dave Neary  wrote:

Hi,

I agree with Chris.

There is also a very well suited channel for general discussion, not
limited to Dovetail, #opnfv - I propose we use that if there are topics
that need real-time interaction. Also, please remember the old Apache
dictum: "If it didn't happen on the mailing list, it didn't happen".
Nowadays, we would probably extend that to "if it didn't happen on the
mailing list, on Jira, on Gerrit, or in the wiki, it didn't happen, but
you get the point - it's important that real-time discussions are
brought back to an asynchronous, archived forum.

Thanks,
Dave.
> On 08/10/2016 08:25 AM, Christopher Price wrote:
> Ok, interesting no-one mentioned that on the last meeting. 
> 
> 
> 
> Can we discuss it as a group on Friday before changing what was agreed 5
> days ago? 
> 
> (Note: releng did create it’s own channel but no longer uses it, rather
> they work on community channels as separate channels are at times not
> very useful for collaborative activities.)
> 
> 
> 
> / Chris
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *From: *Tianhongbo 
> *Date: *Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 13:53
> *To: *Christopher Price , Christopher Price
> , Dave Neary ,
> TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
> *Subject: *答复: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Chris:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we agreed to use the opnfv-meeting.
> 
> But now, there is a requirements that all people like to talk in the IRC
> all time for dovetail like done in the releng or yardstick.
> 
> If we use opnfv-meeting, we cannot do that.
> 
> That is the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> 
> 
> hongbo
> 
> 
> 
> *发件人**:*Christopher Price [mailto:chrispric...@gmail.com]
> *发送时间:* 2016年8月10日 18:34
> *收件人:* Tianhongbo; Christopher Price; Dave Neary; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
> *主题:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Hongbo,
> 
> 
> 
> If I recall, there were comments on the last meeting that people
> preferred to use opnfv-meeting.  I had not heard anyone speak to the
> desire to create another IRC channel for this meeting series.
> 
> 
> 
> My only thought is that it seems unnecessary to create another channel,
> our committers indicated a desire to stay on opnfv-meeting and it is
> unclear why this has come up again.
> 
> 
> 
> / Chris
> 
> 
> 
> *From: * > on behalf of
> Tianhongbo  >
> *Date: *Wednesday 10 August 2016 at 03:02
> *To: *Christopher Price  >, Dave Neary  >, TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
>  >
> *Subject: *[opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]suggest to use the
> #opnfv-dovetail for the dovetail meeting
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all:
> 
> 
> 
> With the development of dovetail, there are more people involved in.
> 
> we used the opnfv-meeting before.
> 
> In order to help people to discuss whenever and wherever, I suggest to
> use the #opnfv-dovetail for dovetail discussion.
> 
> If we have dovetail own IRC, it can avoid the conflict.
> 
> We tested it, it works.
> 
> 
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> 
> 
> hongbo
> 
> ___ opnfv-tech-discuss
> mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

-- 
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss