Open Stack

On 06/18/2014 05:11 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
> On 17:08 Wed 18 Jun     , Anita Kuno wrote:
>> On 06/18/2014 05:03 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
>>> On 16:46 Wed 18 Jun     , Anita Kuno wrote:
>>>> On 06/18/2014 04:21 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to have a service account added please.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pub key:
>>>>> ssh-rsa
>>>>> AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAADAQABAAAAgQCwIZcZ7jwJA3Fo071bvL7rPfKX4zv2t04mf4Xw9jhfgijQjd7WfWxYguLCuEf2ymB8yrn0XKfBV1XqbEhe9V33kPVzcGk0+omDb5BeY7lIgXVAloWHshx7D8UwwFLWUa/RREqaVow+zx5U3Rlg6OK5MyQRBAxeCtTczgPxOB8m3Q==
>>>>>
>>>>> username: datera-storage-ci
>>>>> Fullname: Datera Storage CI
>>>>> email: datera-openstack-ci at datera.io
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Mike Perez
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OpenStack-Infra mailing list
>>>>> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
>>>>>
>>>> Storage is a poor word choice. There will be too many accounts with
>>>> storage in the name.
>>>>
>>>> What is the name of your proprietary product you are testing?
>>>>
>>>> so datera-{name of proprietary thing}-ci
>>>
>>> This is testing for a Cinder driver. datera-block-storage-ci is what comes to
>>> mind, but that does contain storage in the name.
>>>
>> We can go with datera-ci if this is the only ci system datera will ever
>> need.
>>
>> The more we have openstack program names in the account name, the harder
>> it is for the developers.
>>
>> The name ideally should answer the question of why you are testing using
>> a third party ci rather than putting your tests in the cinder gate.
>>
>> What is the name of your cinder driver?
>>
>> Perhaps datera-{name of datera cinder driver}-ci?
>>
>> Anita.
> 
> It's called Datera.
> 
> datera-datera-ci wouldn't be ideal.
> 
Let's go with datera-ci then.

That is perfectly feasible from our end.