Open Stack

Hi Edgar,

Actually, I think that other reviewers saw that name clash, and still
thought it was ok to use the same terminology in such a different context.
BP reviews are a community effort right? So of course someones' idea may be
different from yours.

Regards,
Ivar.


On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com>
wrote:

> Basically, I am admitting that I did not catch in my review the part of
> the endpoint term that Jay was pointing out.
>
> Edgar
>
> On 8/6/14, 11:32 AM, "Sumit Naiksatam" <sumitnaiksatam at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Not sure what you are talking about? You claim now that you had
> >suggestion which was not considered, yet you +2'ed a patch, by stating
> >that "All looks good to me!".
> >
> >On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com>
> >wrote:
> >> That is the beauty of the open source projects, there is always a
> >>smartest
> >> reviewer catching out the facts that you don¹t.
> >>
> >> Edgar
> >>
> >> On 8/6/14, 10:55 AM, "Sumit Naiksatam" <sumitnaiksatam at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Edgar, you seemed to have +2'ed this patch on July 2nd [1]:
> >>>
> >>>"
> >>>Edgar Magana
> >>>Jul 2 8:42 AM
> >>>
> >>>Patch Set 13: Code-Review+2
> >>>
> >>>All looks good to me! I am not approving yet because Nachi was also
> >>>reviewing this code and I would like to see his opinion as well.
> >>>"
> >>>
> >>>That would suggest that you were happy with what was in it. I don't
> >>>see anything in the review comments that suggests otherwise.
> >>>
> >>>[1]  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/95900/
> >>>
> >>>On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com
> >
> >>>wrote:
> >>>> This is the consequence of a proposal that is not following the
> >>>>standardized
> >>>> terminology (IETF - RFC) for any Policy-based System:
> >>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3198
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, I did bring  this point during the Hong Kong Summit but as you
> >>>>can see
> >>>> my comments were totally ignored:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZbOFxAoibZbJmDWx1oOrOsDcov6Cuom5aaB
> >>>>Ir
> >>>>upCD9E/edit
> >>>>
> >>>> I clearly saw this kind of issues coming. Let me quote myself what I
> >>>> suggested: "For instance: "endpoints" should be "enforcement point"
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not understand why GBP did not include this suggestionŠ
> >>>>
> >>>> Edgar
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Kevin Benton <blak111 at gmail.com>
> >>>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
> >>>>questions)"
> >>>> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >>>> Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM
> >>>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> >>>> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way
> >>>> forward
> >>>>
> >>>> What I was referring to was also not Keystone's definition of an
> >>>>endpoint.
> >>>> It's almost as if the term has many uses and was not invented for
> >>>>Keystone.
> >>>> :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChStatEndpoints.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Did a similar discussion occur when Heat wanted to use the word
> >>>>'template'
> >>>> since this was clearly already in use by Horizon?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Aug 6, 2014 9:24 AM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 08/06/2014 02:12 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Given that, pointing to the Nova parity work seems a bit like a red
> >>>>>> herring. This new API is being developed orthogonally to the
> >>>>>>existing
> >>>>>> API endpoints
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You see how you used the term endpoints there? :P
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -jay
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >>>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >>>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140806/624d79ef/attachment.html>