[kuryr] [tc] kuryr project mission
Maysa De Macedo Souza
mdemaced at redhat.com
Tue Oct 29 12:00:44 UTC 2019
Makes total sense.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 12:53 PM Daniel Mellado <dmellado at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/29/19 9:52 AM, Michał Dulko wrote:
> > Hi,
> > It's been more than a year after fuxi  and fuxi-kubernetes  were
> > declared as retired. First one was supposed to integrate Docker with
> > Cinder and Manila. The second was aiming to do the same with
> > Kubernetes.
> > I'm not really sure how to serve the first use case, but it seems like
> > there are some alternatives , . fuxi-kubernetes use case is now
> > served by Cloud Provider OpenStack in Cinder  and Manila  CSI
> > plugins, which seem like a much better fit.
> > Currently the only maintained deliverables in kuryr project are kuryr,
> > kuryr-libnetwork and kuryr-kubernetes. All of them are related to
> > networking. Given that I'd like to propose rephrasing Kuryr mission
> > statement from:
> >> Bridge between container framework networking and storage models
> >> to OpenStack networking and storage abstractions.
> > to
> >> Bridge between container framework networking models
> >> to OpenStack networking abstractions.
> > effectively getting storage out of project scope.
> Do totally agree, both fuxi and fuxi-kubernetes are now completely
> deprecated and overridden by another projects, so tbh it doesn't make
> sense to keep the 'storage' label around any longer.
> > Are there any thoughts or objections? Maybe someone sees a better
> > phrasing?
> Let's just drop the storage part for now
> > Thanks,
> > Michał
> >  https://opendev.org/openstack/fuxi
> >  https://opendev.org/openstack/fuxi-kubernetes
> > 
> >  https://github.com/j-griffith/cinder-docker-driver
> > 
> > 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openstack-discuss