On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:52, David Nalley <david(a)gnsa.us>
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731712
>>
>> The HekaFS maintainers were looking for a appropriate group for their
>> package. I was thinking that perhaps having a 'cloud infrastructure'
>> or 'cloud support' group might be the best place, but we don't have
>> one of those, and I'm not sure what all packages should be in it.
>>
>> Would someone fom the Cloud SIG like to take a stab at it?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bill
>>
>
>
> While I am happy to do this, haven't we already hit string freeze for
> F16 (August 2nd per the schedule)? So we are talking about
> comps-f17.xml.in?
>
> If I were to do so I think I'd put the following in the group:
>
> eucatools
> aeolus
> deltacloud
> sheepdog
> ceph
> glusterfs
> hekafs
> boxgrinder
I am guessing that there will also be a need to have what is optional
and required...
I would possibly suggest that they're all optional, there's lots of
different cloud technologies there a lot of which are completely
standalone separate products that aren't required to interoperate. By
having them all optional there's a menu with the list there and people
can select the particular type of cloud technologies they wish to use.
Peter