Open Stack

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 10:35 AM, joehuang <joehuang at huawei.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> You can search "Triangel doll" from google: https://www.google.com.hk/?gws_rd=ssl#safe=strict&q=triangel+doll
>
> But I also found a definition in http://zh.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Triangel, so I don't know it's a good candidate or not.

O.k, interesting enough.

Cheers,
Shinobu

>
> Please vote or recommend a new candidate. Thanks
>
> Best Regards
> Chaoyi Huang(joehuang)
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Shinobu Kinjo [shinobu.kj at gmail.com]
> Sent: 05 September 2016 6:21
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle]your proposal for the name of networking and gateway sub-projects
>
> Be more careful before emailing the list.
>
>   Triangel is not true.
>
>   Triangle is true.
>
> If there is a word expressed by Triangel, please point it out to me.
>
> Cheers,
> Shinobu
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Vega Cai <luckyvega.g at gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 for Triangel
>>
>> On 2 September 2016 at 17:34, joehuang <joehuang at huawei.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> After the discussion in the #openstack-tricircle channel, 3 candidates
>>> available now, please vote the name for the new sub-project for api-gateway
>>> functionality:
>>>
>>> 1. Triangel
>>>     The Triangel are dolls that bring luck
>>> 2. Tridonut
>>>     Three Donuts. Delicious food, often buy 3 get 1 free.
>>> 3. Trifennel
>>>     Three Fennel. Fennel is highly prized for its licorice-like flavor and
>>> the myriad of health benefits it provides
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Chaoyi Huang(joehuang)
>>>
>>>
>>> From: joehuang
>>> Sent: 02 September 2016 11:19
>>> To: openstack-dev; mordred at inaugust.com
>>> Subject: RE: [openstack-dev][tricircle]your proposal for the name of
>>> networking and gateway sub-projects
>>>
>>> I have some rough ideas about the name of gateway sub-project, for
>>> example, triangle, tridonut, tricookie etc, so that we can see that
>>> Tricircle and the new sub-project are like sibling in OpenStack. And they
>>> often will be listed closely in order.
>>>
>>> Your thoughts?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Chaoyi Huang(joehuang)
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: joehuang
>>> Sent: 02 September 2016 10:22
>>> To: openstack-dev; mordred at inaugust.com
>>> Subject: [openstack-dev][tricircle]your proposal for the name of
>>> networking and gateway sub-projects
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> If we want to divide Tricircle into two sub-projects, your proposals for
>>> the name of sub-projects are welcome.
>>>
>>> Because the Tricircle is applying big-tent application, and the networking
>>> part will be remained in the Tricircle repository, and continue the big-tent
>>> application. So if we change the networking sub-project name from
>>> "Tricircle" to another one, we have to update a lots of places: from infra,
>>> to source code, to documentation, google docs, to wiki, etc, it's a huge
>>> work, and history background will also be lost, from this point of view, I
>>> proposal to remain current Tricircle repository name, but shrink the
>>> Tricircle scope to cross Neutron networking automation.
>>>
>>> And for gateway part, a new repository is required, new project name is
>>> more applicable, this is just my thoughts, would like to know your
>>> proposals.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Chaoyi Huang(joehuang)
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: joehuang
>>> Sent: 01 September 2016 9:02
>>> To: Monty Taylor; openstack-dev
>>> Subject: RE: [openstack-dev][tricircle]How to address TCs concerns in
>>> Tricircle big-tent application
>>>
>>> Hello, Monty,
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for your guide and encouragement, then let's move on
>>> this direction.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Chaoyi Huang (joehuang)
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Monty Taylor [mordred at inaugust.com]
>>> Sent: 01 September 2016 0:37
>>> To: joehuang; openstack-dev
>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev][tricircle]How to address TCs concerns in
>>> Tricircle big-tent application
>>>
>>> On 08/31/2016 02:16 AM, joehuang wrote:
>>> > Hello, team,
>>> >
>>> > During last weekly meeting, we discussed how to address TCs concerns in
>>> > Tricircle big-tent application. After the weekly meeting, the proposal
>>> > was co-prepared by our
>>> > contributors:
>>> > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kpVo5rsL6p_rq9TvkuczjommJSsisDiKJiurbhaQg7E
>>> >
>>> > The more doable way is to divide Tricircle into two independent and
>>> > decoupled projects, only one of the projects which deal with networking
>>> > automation will try to become an big-tent project, And Nova/Cinder
>>> > API-GW will be removed from the scope of big-tent project application,
>>> > and put them into another project:
>>> >
>>> > *TricircleNetworking:* Dedicated for cross Neutron networking automation
>>> > in multi-region OpenStack deployment, run without or with
>>> > TricircleGateway. Try to become big-tent project in the current
>>> > application of https://review.openstack.org/#/c/338796/.
>>>
>>> Great idea.
>>>
>>> > *TricircleGateway:* Dedicated to provide API gateway for those who need
>>> > single Nova/Cinder API endpoint in multi-region OpenStack deployment,
>>> > run without or with TricircleNetworking. Live as non-big-tent,
>>> > non-offical-openstack project, just like Tricircle toady’s status. And
>>> > not pursue big-tent only if the consensus can be achieved in OpenStack
>>> > community, including Arch WG and TCs, then decide how to get it on board
>>> > in OpenStack. A new repository is needed to be applied for this project.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > And consider to remove some overlapping implementation in Nova/Cinder
>>> > API-GW for global objects like flavor, volume type, we can configure one
>>> > region as master region, all global objects like flavor, volume type,
>>> > server group, etc will be managed in the master Nova/Cinder service. In
>>> > Nova API-GW/Cinder API-GW, all requests for these global objects will be
>>> > forwarded to the master Nova/Cinder, then to get rid of any API
>>> > overlapping-implementation.
>>> >
>>> > More information, you can refer to the proposal draft
>>> >
>>> > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kpVo5rsL6p_rq9TvkuczjommJSsisDiKJiurbhaQg7E,
>>> >
>>> > your thoughts are welcome, and let's have more discussion in this weekly
>>> > meeting.
>>>
>>> I think this is a great approach Joe.
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Email:
> shinobu at linux.com
> shinobu at redhat.com
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Email:
shinobu at linux.com
shinobu at redhat.com