Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Cloud infrastructure package group

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


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
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud

[Older Fedora Users Mail]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Triage]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Apps]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]

Powered by Linux

Google
  Web www.spinics.net