Hi,
I was wondering if it would be possible for NoVNC to switch from
websockify to sockjs-client, which is available here:
https://github.com/sockjs/sockjs-client
This has the advantage of not using flash at all (pure javascript), and
continuing to work on all browsers, with a much cleaner licen
So, we've spoken about using containers on baremetal - e.g. the lxc
provider - in the past, and with the [righteously deserved] noise
Docker is receiving, I think we need to have a short
expectation-setting discussion.
Previously we've said that deploying machines to deploy containers to
deploy Op
I'm going to skip this this month: with most folk having ~2 weeks of
leave there's only an effective 2 weeks of delta - both in practice
for new reviewers, and in changes to track for existing -core since
the last review - it seems a little pointless.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Techno
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 12/29/2013 03:06 AM, Day, Phil wrote:
>
>
> Basically, I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve - lets tease
>>> that
>>> out, and then talk about how to solve it. "Backwards incompatible change
>>> landed" might be the problem - b
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Ulrich Schwickerath <
ulrich.schwicker...@cern.ch> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I'd like to trigger a new discussion about the future of quota management
> in OpenStack. Let me start with our main user story to clarify what we need.
> I'm working for CERN for the IT dep
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Robert Collins
wrote:
> On 1 January 2014 06:07, Joe Gordon wrote:
>>
>>
>
>>
>> I am not sure if this is the global .gitignore you are thinking of but this
>> is the one I am in favor of:
>>
>> https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files#global-gitignore
>>
>
On Dec 31, 2013 3:00 PM, "Michael Still" wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> > A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
> >
> >
> > And here is it running against nova:
> >
http://logs.openstack.org/8
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
>
>
> And here is it running against nova:
> http://logs.openstack.org/84/64584/1/check/gate-hacking-integration-nova/b31c47e/console.html
A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
And here is it running against nova:
http://logs.openstack.org/84/64584/1/check/gate-hacking-integration-nova/b31c47e/console.html
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya
wrote:
On 1 January 2014 06:07, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> I am not sure if this is the global .gitignore you are thinking of but this
> is the one I am in favor of:
>
> https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files#global-gitignore
>
>
> Maintaining .gitignore in 30+ repositories for a potentially inf
Hi.
So while turbo hipster is new, I've been reading every failure message
it produces to make sure its not too badly wrong. There were four
failures posted last night while I slept:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64521
This one is a TH bug. We shouldn't be testing
I guess this isn't a new discussion. I did some more digging and apparently
this is what came out of the last discussion:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/EventScheduler
That definitely seems like it would be something simple we could use, since it
only provides scheduling and that's all we nee
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 8:45 AM, John Griffith
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Everyone,
>>
>> I wanted to see where we stand on IDE extensions in .gitignore files.
>> We seem to have some back and forth, one cycle there's a bug and a
>> patch to add
I am not sure if this is the global .gitignore you are thinking of but this
> is the one I am in favor of:
>
> https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files#global-gitignore
>
>
> Maintaining .gitignore in 30+ repositories for a potentially infinite
> number of editors is very hard, and thankfull
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 8:45 AM, John Griffith
wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
>
> I wanted to see where we stand on IDE extensions in .gitignore files.
> We seem to have some back and forth, one cycle there's a bug and a
> patch to add things like eclipse, idea etc and the next there's a bug
> and a patch
On 2013-12-31 09:45:38 -0700 (-0700), John Griffith wrote:
[...]
> Anyway, I'd like to see all of the projects agree on this... or even
> consider moving to a global .gitignore. Thoughts??
Personal opinion, the per-project .gitignore should be reserved
exclusively for autogenerated artifacts tool
Hey Everyone,
I wanted to see where we stand on IDE extensions in .gitignore files.
We seem to have some back and forth, one cycle there's a bug and a
patch to add things like eclipse, idea etc and the next there's a bug
and a patch to remove them. I'd like to have some sort of consensus
on what
Hi Nir
Good question. There's absolutely no reason not to allow more than 2
subnets, or even 2 of the same IP versions on the gateway port. In fact, in
our POC we allowed this (or, more specifically, we did not disallow it).
However, for the gateway port to the provider's next-hop router, we did n
Agreed taskflow doesn't currently provide scheduling as it was thought that
reliable execution that can be restarted and resumed is the foundation that
someone using taskflow can easily provide scheduling ontop of... Better IMHO to
have a project doing this foundation well (since openstack would
+1
On Dec 30, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Vipul Sabhaya wrote:
> +1
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 30, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Craig Vyvial wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Greg Hill wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> On Dec 27, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Michael Basnight wrote:
>>
>>> Howdy,
>>>
Hi,
It seems that she/he is behaving oddly again. I have posted a patch that does
not have any database changes and it has give me a –1….
Happy new year
Gary
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-
Hi,
With regards to
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/allow-multiple-subnets-on-gateway-port,
can you please clarify this statement: "We will disallow more that two
subnets, and exclude allowing 2 IPv4 or 2 IPv6 subnets".
The use case for dual-stack with one IPv4 and one IPv6 add
Hi,
Currently there is no way to enable or disable meters without restarting
ceilometer.
There are cases where operators do not want to run all the meters continuously.
In these cases, there should be a way to disable or enable them dynamically.
We are working on this feature right now. I have
23 matches
Mail list logo
