On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Devananda van der Veen <
devananda@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for putting this back on my radar
>
> I think a separate directory to indicate "these are contributed but less
> tested drivers" is a fair middle ground here, though time will tell how
> much ad
Thanks for putting this back on my radar
I think a separate directory to indicate "these are contributed but less
tested drivers" is a fair middle ground here, though time will tell how
much addtitional code-maintenance burden that places on developers. Since
this is just a power interface, I
pment Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> >> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 3:18:22 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] handling drivers that will not be
> third-party tested
> >>
> >> On Thu, May
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 17:03 -0700, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or
> another, are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
>
>
> Take for example the iBoot driver proposed here:
> https://review.openstack.org/50977
>
drivers that will not be third-party
tested
I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or another, are
probably never going to have third party CI testing.
Take for example the iBoot driver proposed here:
https://review.openstack.org/50977
I would like to encourage this ty
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Doug Hellmann"
>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 3:18:22 PM
>> Subje
- Original Message -
> From: "Doug Hellmann"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 3:18:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] handling drivers that will not be
> third-party
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes
wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Devananda van der Veen
> wrote:
>> I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or another,
>> are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
>>
>> Take for example the iBoo
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Dan Prince wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Devananda van der Veen" >
> [...]
>
> interface. However, I also don't expect the author to provide a full
> > third-party CI environment, and as such, we should not claim the same
> level
> > of test cov
- Original Message -
> From: "Devananda van der Veen"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List"
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 8:03:15 PM
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] handling drivers that will not be
> third-party tested
>
> I'
> Linux has a very different model then OpenStack does, the article you
> mention is talking about a whole separate git repo, along with a separate
> (re: just OR, not exclusive or) set of maintainers. If you leave these
> drivers in a staging directory would you still require two cores for the
> c
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:48 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes
wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Devananda van der Veen
> wrote:
> > I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or
> another,
> > are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
> >
> > Take for example th
IMO the separated did in the project repo is a good approach (like
contrib dir in Heat).
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 09:48 +0100, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Devananda van der Veen
>> wrote:
>> > I'd like to br
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 09:48 +0100, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Devananda van der Veen
> wrote:
> > I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or another,
> > are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
> >
> > Take for example the
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Devananda van der Veen
wrote:
> I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or another,
> are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
>
> Take for example the iBoot driver proposed here:
> https://review.openstack.org/50977
>
> I
+1 for community contribs and a common place for them to be sourced.
From: Devananda van der Veen [mailto:devananda@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 5:03 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] handling drivers that will not be third-party
tested
I'd like to bring up the topic of drivers which, for one reason or another,
are probably never going to have third party CI testing.
Take for example the iBoot driver proposed here:
https://review.openstack.org/50977
I would like to encourage this type of driver as it enables individual
contrib
17 matches
Mail list logo
