hi, Leon:
welcome to join the Karbor project.
sounds a good suggestion, but the checkpoints belong to each provider
in current design, I am afraid of there are many impactive points for the
whole framework.
did you make design impact analysis?
2016-09-11 20:45 GMT+08:00 Leon Wang <wanghui at 8hutech.com>:
> I've added this item to the agenda of the next team meeting. link:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Karbor
>
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
> *From: * "王辉"<wanghui at 8hutech.com>;
> *Date: * Sun, Sep 11, 2016 08:24 PM
> *To: * "openstack-dev"<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>;
> *Cc: * "yuval.brik"<yuval.brik at toganetworks.com>;
> *Subject: * [Karbor] Thoughts on Decoupling Checkpoint API from the
> current Provider API
>
> Hi Team,
>
> I'm new to Karbor and stumbled upon the Provider API recently. I find it
> more intuitive that if we could decouple the Checkpoint API out users could
> directly operate on Checkpoint related actions.
>
> I've filled out a BP about it (https://blueprints.launchpad.
> net/karbor/+spec/checkpoint-decouple) and I'm looking forward to the
> coming weekly Karbor meeting.
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
--
Edward Lee
---------------------
open source in China
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160913/cc8a2c71/attachment.html>