[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Evolving the stadium concept

Sean M. Collins sean at coreitpro.com
Thu Feb 4 16:55:47 UTC 2016

On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 04:20:50AM EST, Assaf Muller wrote:
> I understand you see 'Dragonflow being part of the Neutron stadium'
> and 'Dragonflow having high visibility' as tied together. I'm curious,
> from a practical perspective, how does being a part of the stadium
> give Dragonflow visibility? If it were not a part of the stadium and
> you had your own PTL etc, what specifically would change so that
> Dragonflow would be less visible. 

> Currently I don't understand why
> being a part of the stadium is good or bad for a networking project,
> or why does it matter. 

I think the issue is of public perception. As others have stated, the
issue is the "in" vs. "out" problem. We had a similar situation
with 3rd party CI, where we had a list of drivers that were "nice" and
had CI running vs drivers that were "naughty" and didn't. Prior to the
vendor decomposition effort, We had a multitude of drivers that were
in-tree, with the public perception that drivers that were in Neutron's
tree were "sanctioned" by the Neutron project. 

That may not have been the intention, but that's what I think happened.

Sean M. Collins

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list