Open Stack

​Anita, thanks for the response. My comments inline:​



> Well then we are in a situation where development ceases until the third
> party systems respond. Which is not a situation we want to put ourselves
> in. We actually are actively avoiding that situation.
>
> ​I don't mean to run after the change is merged, but after is verified,
which is the first step. And I don't mean neither that they should vote. So
I don't see that means the development ceases until the third party
respond...

The failure on the '.' at the end of the commit title is a style test,
> not something the third party tests would run anyway.
>

​Absolutely agree. My point is that third party have had to run two times:
one before the '.' patch and the other one after. And third party opinion
is worthless if Jenkins says -1. Just want to avoid the first run.
​

> Thanks,
> Anita.
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

​Regards,​

-- 
Jaume Devesa
Software Engineer at Midokura
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140612/b6e8bed1/attachment.html>