<div dir="ltr">As i have commented on the patch i will also send this to the mailing list:<div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;white-space:pre-wrap">I really dont see why Dragonflow is not part of this list, given the criteria you listed.</span><br></div><div><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">Dragonflow is fully developed under Neutron/OpenStack, no other repositories.
It is fully Open source and already have a community of people contributing and interest from various different companies and OpenStack deployers. (I can prepare the list of active contributions and of interested parties)
It also puts OpenStack Neutron APIs and use cases as first class citizens and working on being an integral part of OpenStack.</p><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">I agree that OVN needs to be part of the list, but you brought up this criteria in regards to ODL, so:
OVN like ODL is not only Neutron and OpenStack and is even running/being implemented on a whole different governance model and requirements to it.</p><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">I think you also forgot to mention some other projects as well that are fully open source with a vibrant and diverse community, i will let them comment here by themselves.</p><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">Frankly this approach disappoints me, I have honestly worked hard to make Dragonflow fully visible and add and support open discussion and follow the correct guidelines to work in a project. I think that Dragonflow community has already few members from various companies and this is only going to grow in the near future. (in addition to deployers that are considering it as a solution) we also welcome anyone that wants to join and be part of the process to step in, we are very welcoming</p><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">I also think that the correct way to do this is to actually add as reviewers all lieutenants of the projects you are now removing from Neutron big stadium and letting them comment.</p><p style="white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif">Gal.</p></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Russell Bryant <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rbryant@redhat.com" target="_blank">rbryant@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 11/30/2015 07:56 PM, Armando M. wrote:<br>
> I would like to suggest that we evolve the structure of the Neutron<br>
> governance, so that most of the deliverables that are now part of the<br>
> Neutron stadium become standalone projects that are entirely<br>
> self-governed (they have their own core/release teams, etc).<br>
<br>
After thinking over the discussion in this thread for a while, I have<br>
started the following proposal to implement the stadium renovation that<br>
Armando originally proposed in this thread.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275888" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275888</a><br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Russell Bryant<br>
<br>
__________________________________________________________________________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">Best Regards ,<br><br>The G. </div>
</div>