Open Stack

> On Mar 3, 2015, at 1:29 AM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> Upstream Training Vancouver is open and people have started to sign up.
> Tim Freund and Chris Ricker are two confirmed trainers, we're waiting
> for at least one more trainer to confirm availability but as in other
> cases, the more the merrier: we will need help in the classroom and
> after the summit, with online mentoring.
> 
> We'll be using this mailing list to coordinate, using the tag [upstream]
> in the subject.
> 
> One of the first things to do is to fix the slides for Vancouver. They
> are in a git repo:
> 
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/training-guides/tree/doc/upstream-training
> 
> Currently they are in landslide format, although there was a request to
> port them to Hieroglyph in order to reduce the requirements.txt in all
> our projects. I have made an attempt at porting to Hiero
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/132395/ but at the same time Sean
> Roberts started setting things up for landslide in
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141226/
> 
> I think we need to just pick one format, I don't care much which, and
> provide the content to trainers. 
> 
> Thoughts?

As the person who originally asked about using hieroglyph instead of landslide, I’ll say I don’t really care one way or the other either. I pointed out that hieroglyph builds on a tool many contributors are already familiar with, which might reduce the overhead for contribution, but landslide isn’t that complex so it may not be work rebuilding everything to use a new tool.

We also no longer need all build dependencies listed in the global requirements list, so it would be possible to install and use the tool in a job without syncing requirements from the global list.

Doug

> 
> /stef
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community