On 07/05/15 19:19 -0500, Dolph Mathews wrote:
We didn't pick Falcon because Kurt was Marconi's PTL and Falcon's
maintainer. The main reason it was picked was related to performance
first[0] and time (We didn't/don't have enough resources to even think
of porting the API) and at this p
On Monday, May 4, 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 02/05/15 12:02 -0700, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On May 2, 2015, at 10:28, Monty Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote:
Hi all,
At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was
Hi all,
To be clear, both Pecan and Falcon are actively maintained and have
healthy communities. In any case, I tend to point OpenStack projects
toward Pecan as the default choice, since that lets you take advantage of
all the benefits standardization has to offer. Of course, you need to
quantify
On 02/05/15 12:02 -0700, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
On May 2, 2015, at 10:28, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote:
Hi all,
At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a
discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision
at th
> On May 2, 2015, at 10:28, Monty Taylor wrote:
>
>> On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a
>> discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision
>> at the time was that Pecan was to
On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a
> discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision
> at the time was that Pecan was to be the only supported framework and
> that for incubation Barb
Hi all,
At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a
discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision
at the time was that Pecan was to be the only supported framework and
that for incubation Barbican had to convert to Pecan (from Falcon).
Keystone is
