Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-15 Thread Preethi Thomas
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Bryan Kearney wrote: > On 12/12/2017 11:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > > > - Lazy downloading. I think this should be a top 3.1 priority. It will > > take a significant effort to update/test/release the streamer so I don't > > think we can include it in 3.0 for

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-15 Thread Bryan Kearney
On 12/12/2017 11:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > - Lazy downloading. I think this should be a top 3.1 priority. It will > take a significant effort to update/test/release the streamer so I don't > think we can include it in 3.0 for practical timeline reasons. This is the one that worries me. Do n

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-14 Thread Brian Bouterse
I moved this content to the 3.1+ page. If you reload the MVP page you can see the latest.: https://pulp.plan.io/projects/pulp/wiki/Pulp_3_Minimum_Viable_Product On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Dennis Kliban wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Austin Macdonald > wrote: > >> +1 >>

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread Dennis Kliban
+1 On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Bihan Zhang wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Jeff Ortel wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On 12/12/2017 10:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: >>> >>> As we get to the end of the MVP p

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread Austin Macdonald
+1 On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Bihan Zhang wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Jeff Ortel wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On 12/12/2017 10:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: >> >> As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in >> about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functi

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread Bihan Zhang
+1 On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Jeff Ortel wrote: > +1 > > On 12/12/2017 10:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in > about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functionality to the 3.1+ page [0]. I'm > looking for feedback, especially -1

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread Jeff Ortel
+1 On 12/12/2017 10:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functionality to the 3.1+ page [0]. I'm looking for feedback, especially -1s, about deferring the following 3 things from the Pulp 3.0 releas

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread Daniel Alley
+1 here too On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 8:28 AM, David Davis wrote: > I think this makes sense. +1 from me. > > > David > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Brian Bouterse > wrote: > >> As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in >> about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functi

Re: [Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-13 Thread David Davis
I think this makes sense. +1 from me. David On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in > about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functionality to the 3.1+ page [0]. I'm > looking for feedback, especially -1s, about d

[Pulp-dev] Deferring 3 things for Pulp3 to 3.1+

2017-12-12 Thread Brian Bouterse
As we get to the end of the MVP planning for Pulp3, I want to check-in about deferring 3 areas of Pulp functionality to the 3.1+ page [0]. I'm looking for feedback, especially -1s, about deferring the following 3 things from the Pulp 3.0 release. This would finalize a few still-red or totally missi