Open Stack

    Yes we can discuss this during the meeting as well.  

On Jul 23, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Evgeny Fedoruk <EvgenyF at Radware.com>
 wrote:

> Hi Carlos,
> 
> As I understand you are working on common module for Barbican  interactions.
> I will commit my code later today and I will appreciate if you and anybody else  who is interested will review this change.
> There is one specific spot for the common Barbican interactions module API integration.
> After the IRC meeting tomorrow, we can discuss the work items and decide who is interested/available to do them.
> Does it make sense?
> 
> Thanks,
> Evg
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Garza [mailto:carlos.garza at rackspace.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:15 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS capability - work division
> 
>    Do you have any idea as to how we can split up the work?
> 
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Evgeny Fedoruk <EvgenyF at Radware.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm working on TLS integration with loadbalancer v2 extension and db.
>> Basing on Brandon's  patches https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105609 , https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105331/  , https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105610/
>> I will abandon previous 2 patches for TLS which are https://review.openstack.org/#/c/74031/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102837/ 
>> Managing to submit my change later today. It will include lbaas extension v2 modification, lbaas db v2 modifications, alembic migration for schema changes and new tests in unit testing for lbaas db v2.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Evg
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carlos Garza [mailto:carlos.garza at rackspace.com] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 3:54 AM
>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS capability - work division
>> 
>> 	Since it looks like the TLS blueprint was approved I''m sure were all eager to start coded so how should we divide up work on the source code. I have Pull requests in pyopenssl "https://github.com/pyca/pyopenssl/pull/143". and a few one liners in pica/cryptography to expose the needed low-level that I'm hoping will be added pretty soon to that PR 143 test's can pass. Incase it doesn't we will fall back to using the pyasn1_modules as it already also has a means to fetch what we want at a lower level. 
>> I'm just hoping that we can split the work up so that we can collaborate together on this with out over serializing the work were people become dependent on waiting for some one else to complete their work or worse one person ending up doing all the work.
>> 
>>                                                                               Carlos D. Garza _______________________________________________
>> 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