+1, solid reasoning (surface area that infra hits vs osc), would love to have the infra-core team onboard stevemar From: Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org> Date: 2015/12/03 11:53 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] [os-client-config][infra] Proposing adding infra-core to core Hey all, os-client-config is now in the critical path for Infra's Nodepool, meaning that there are some places where a bug surfacing in it can take down the entire CI infrastructure. Infra also uses many more of the advanced features in clouds.yaml than most other people, so the surface area that could be tickled is higher than day-to-day use via openstackclient. While this is unlikely to happen, because it's not a high-volume changing project, it would still be nice to have a safety valve. For that reason, and because the os-client-config core group is small in the first place, I'd like to add the infra-core group as a subgroup to to os-client-config-core. Monty __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 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/20151203/271ae212/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: graycol.gif Type: image/gif Size: 105 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151203/271ae212/attachment.gif>
