Open Stack

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Doug Wiegley <dougwig at parksidesoftware.com>
wrote:

>
> > On Apr 23, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 04/23/2015 01:19 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23 April 2015 at 09:58, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com
> >> <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>    On 04/23/2015 12:14 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 23 April 2015 at 07:32, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com <mailto:
> rbryant at redhat.com>
> >>> <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>    On 04/22/2015 10:33 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>        Would it make sense to capture these projects as simply
> >>>>        'affiliated', ie. with a loose relationship to Neutron,
> >>>    because
> >>>>        they use/integrate with Neutron in some form or
> >>    another (e.g.
> >>>>        having 3rd-party, extending-api,
> >>    integrating-via-plugin-model,
> >>>>        etc)? Then we could simply consider extending the
> >>>    projects.yaml
> >>>>        to capture this new concept (for Neutron or any
> >>    other project)
> >>>>        once we defined its ontology.
> >>>>
> >>>>        Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>    That seems interesting, but given the communities stated
> >>    goals
> >>>>    around Big Tent, it seems to me like affiliation or not,
> >>    adding
> >>>>    these under the Neutron tent, inside the larger
> >>    OpenStack Bigger
> >>>>    Tent, would be a good thing.
> >>>>
> >>>>    Thanks,
> >>>>    Kyle
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for clearing some of the questions I raised. I should
> >>>    stress the
> >>>> fact that I welcome the idea of finding a more sensible home
> >>    for these
> >>>> projects in light of the big tent developments, but it seems
> >>    like
> >>>    we're
> >>>> still pouring down the foundations. I'd rather get us to a
> >>    point where
> >>>> the landscape is clear, and the dust settled. That would help us
> >>>    make a
> >>>> more informed decision compared to the one we can make right
> >>    now.
> >>>
> >>>    Can you be a bit more specific about what's not clear and
> >>    would help
> >>>    make you feel more informed?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I am not clear on how we make a decision, as to which project
> >>    belongs or
> >>> doesn't to the Neutron 'umbrella', 'tent', 'stadium' or however we end
> >>> up calling it :)
> >>
> >>    OK, that's fine.  Figuring that out is the next step if folks agree
> with
> >>    Neutron as the home for networking-foo repos.  I'm happy to write up
> a
> >>    strawman proposal for inclusion criteria and a set of expectations
> >>    around responsibilities and communication.
> >>
> >>
> >> What about the other Neutron related ones that didn't strictly follow
> >> the networking- prefix in the name, would the naming convention be one
> >> of the criteria? I look forward to your proposal.
> >
> > Good question.  I think consistency is good, especially when there are
> > so many of them.  It helps make it clear that they're all following some
> > sort of pattern.  Luckily we do have a way to get repos renamed if
> needed.
>
> There is one existing project, stackforge/octavia, which is quite active
> and has used its codename extensively. Suggested naming I’d be ok with, but
> enforced naming seems… confining.
>
> Thanks,
> doug
>
>
>
If we've reached the point where we're arguing about naming, dos this mean
we've built consensus on the "yes, it makes sense for these to live under
Neutron" argument?

Thanks,
Kyle


> >
> > --
> > Russell Bryant
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150423/873c31d7/attachment.html>