Miguel Duarte Barroso
Miguel Duarte Barroso
> Thank you for your response @maiqueb :) Sure, that will be a good start. Thank you for inviting me to the bi-monthly call. Can you please let me know...
@toelke thanks for pointing me towards this issue, and also for your PR. I would welcome a PR with a design proposal for this feature. You can refer to #237...
Thank you. I'll get to this next week.
> @maiqueb Suggest we do the same with bond mode change: user need to explicit when switching port mode with whole configurations. Right. I think that keeping interface state merging...
> I want to put one restraint on whatever is chosen here as a valid solution: > > * k-nmstate should not depend on any other tool directly. It should...
> we need to beware that `2209201404-84bdd23` might break CI (not included in this PR, but it we merge it, it will be included) Would you care to elaborate on...
> > > we need to beware that `2209201404-84bdd23` might break CI (not included in this PR, but it we merge it, it will be included) > > > >...
/lgtm /retest-failed We need this backport don't we @xpivarc ?