Hi,

On 10/29/19 9:52 AM, Michał Dulko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's been more than a year after fuxi [1] and fuxi-kubernetes [2] 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 [3], [4]. fuxi-kubernetes use case is now
> served by Cloud Provider OpenStack in Cinder [5] and Manila [6] 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
Best!

Daniel
>
> [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/fuxi
> [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/fuxi-kubernetes
> [3] https://rexray.readthedocs.io/en/stable/user-guide/schedulers/docker/plug-ins/openstack/
> [4] https://github.com/j-griffith/cinder-docker-driver
> [5] https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/blob/master/docs/using-cinder-csi-plugin.md
> [6] https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/blob/master/docs/using-manila-csi-plugin.md
>
>