Open Stack

I was under the impression we did have a majority of cores in favor of the
idea at the midcycle. But if this is a vote-vote, then I am a very strong
+1 as well. This is something operators will absolutely want and and need.

Sam Yaple

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Michał Jastrzębski <inc007 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Strong +1 from me. This have multiple benefits:
> Easier (aka possible) debugging of networking in running envs (not
> having tools like tcpdump at your disposal is a pain) - granted, there
> are ways to get this working without thin containers but require fair
> amount of docker knowledge.
> Docker daemon restart will not break routers - currently with docker
> restart container with namespace dies and we lose our routers (they
> will migrate using HA, but well, still a networking downtime). This
> will no longer be the case so...
> Upgrades with no vm downtime whatsoever depends on this one.
> If we could deploy liberty code with all these nice stuff, I'd be
> happier person;)
>
> Cheers,
> Michal
>
> On 20 February 2016 at 07:40, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
> wrote:
> > Just clarifying, this is not a "revote" - there were not enough core
> > reviewers in favor of this idea at the Kolla midcycle, so we need to
> have a
> > vote on the mailing list to sort out this policy decision of managing
> > stable/liberty.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -steve
> >
> >
> > From: Steven Dake <stdake at cisco.com>
> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> > <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> > Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 6:28 AM
> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> > <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] port neutron thin containers to
> > stable/liberty
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > There were not enough core reviewers to pass a majority approval of the
> > neutron thin container backport idea, so we separated it out from fixing
> > stable/liberty itself.
> >
> > I am going to keep voting open for *2* weeks this time.  The reason for
> the
> > two weeks is I would like a week of discussion before people just blindly
> > vote ;)
> >
> > Voting begins now and concludes March 4th.  Since this is a policy
> decision,
> > no veto votes are permitted, just a +1 and a  -1.  Abstaining is the
> same as
> > voting –1.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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/20160220/744e2b2c/attachment.html>