fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Also, is it your POC using Pecan? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99069/


On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Nick,
> if you've got a time for it - I would love to see more formal approach to
> the analysis. We know our requirements for Fuel already (we do, right?)),
> so I believe we could have a comparison table, with features we need in
> rows and frameworks in columns.
> You mentioned some of the features already, such as PATCH,
> application/json type without monkey-patching, etc.
>
> If we follow this way and collaboratively feel up such a table, there will
> be no question what to take when it comes to finally choose framework and
> start development.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Tomasz Napierala <tnapierala@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> On 20 Aug 2014, at 18:14, Nikolay Markov <nmarkov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> > Lukasz,
>> >
>> > I did try this configuration and it was hell. I shared my experience in
>> previous letters in this thread. Please don't hesitate to share your
>> experience If you have some other thoughts.
>> >
>> > The thing is, we won't really have much time after 5.1 and before 6.0,
>> so all big-size decisions should be done as early as possible.
>>
>> I agree that it might be too late after release. So maybe we should wait
>> until after HCF - most people will have some spare time to do research /
>> familiarize themselves with various frameworks. What do you think about it?
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Tomasz Napierala
>> Sr. OpenStack Engineer
>> tnapierala@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Scherbakov
> #mihgen
>
>


-- 
Mike Scherbakov
#mihgen