Quick question, I seem to remember there was a review request for python-cloudservers that was semi-abandoned, did I miss when it got packaged? It certainly is not in fedora 15 last time I checked.
On Aug 23, 2011 2:30 PM, "David Nalley" <david@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:52, David Nalley <david@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731712
>>>>>
>>>>> The HekaFS maintainers were looking for a appropriate group for their
>>>>> package. I was thinking that perhaps having a 'cloud infrastructure'
>>>>> or 'cloud support' group might be the best place, but we don't have
>>>>> one of those, and I'm not sure what all packages should be in it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would someone fom the Cloud SIG like to take a stab at it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I am happy to do this, haven't we already hit string freeze for
>>>> F16 (August 2nd per the schedule)? So we are talking about
>>>> comps-f17.xml.in?
>>>>
>>>> If I were to do so I think I'd put the following in the group:
>>>>
>>>> eucatools
>>>> aeolus
>>>> deltacloud
>>>> sheepdog
>>>> ceph
>>>> glusterfs
>>>> hekafs
>>>> boxgrinder
>>>
>>> I am guessing that there will also be a need to have what is optional
>>> and required...
>>
>> I would possibly suggest that they're all optional, there's lots of
>> different cloud technologies there a lot of which are completely
>> standalone separate products that aren't required to interoperate. By
>> having them all optional there's a menu with the list there and people
>> can select the particular type of cloud technologies they wish to use.
>>
>
> I tend to agree, the spread is so wide, and includes everything from
> HA stuff for the cloud to multiple distributed filesystems, to IaaS
> platforms..... short of us defining cloud rather restrictively, I
> think this needs to be all optional.
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:52, David Nalley <david@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731712
>>>>>
>>>>> The HekaFS maintainers were looking for a appropriate group for their
>>>>> package. I was thinking that perhaps having a 'cloud infrastructure'
>>>>> or 'cloud support' group might be the best place, but we don't have
>>>>> one of those, and I'm not sure what all packages should be in it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would someone fom the Cloud SIG like to take a stab at it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I am happy to do this, haven't we already hit string freeze for
>>>> F16 (August 2nd per the schedule)? So we are talking about
>>>> comps-f17.xml.in?
>>>>
>>>> If I were to do so I think I'd put the following in the group:
>>>>
>>>> eucatools
>>>> aeolus
>>>> deltacloud
>>>> sheepdog
>>>> ceph
>>>> glusterfs
>>>> hekafs
>>>> boxgrinder
>>>
>>> I am guessing that there will also be a need to have what is optional
>>> and required...
>>
>> I would possibly suggest that they're all optional, there's lots of
>> different cloud technologies there a lot of which are completely
>> standalone separate products that aren't required to interoperate. By
>> having them all optional there's a menu with the list there and people
>> can select the particular type of cloud technologies they wish to use.
>>
>
> I tend to agree, the spread is so wide, and includes everything from
> HA stuff for the cloud to multiple distributed filesystems, to IaaS
> platforms..... short of us defining cloud rather restrictively, I
> think this needs to be all optional.
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list
> cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
