I'm on board with getting visibility into the drivers with improvements to driverlog, etc. What I'm uncertain of is providing much in the lines of 'validation'. Core reviewers don't frequently have access to the hardware or software required to validate these drivers so we can't be sure if the features really are working as expected. If validation is as flexible as you highlighted in the email, we can at least get it to a point where all recent CI runs are linkable from driverlog and people can see recent tempest runs. I don't foresee the Neutron team getting to a point soon where we vouch for certain drivers though just because it is so hard to keep up with their changes (even ignoring changes in the vendor hardware itself). On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Mike Perez <thingee at gmail.com> wrote: > On 18:35 Jan 22, Kevin Benton wrote: > > I would like to propose my candidacy for the Neutron PTL. > > > > I have been contributing to Neutron since the Havana development > > cycle working for a network vendor and then a distribution vendor. > > I have been a core reviewer since the Kilo development cycle and > > I am on the Neutron stable maintenance team as well as the drivers > > team. > > > > I have a few priorities that I would focus on as PTL: > > Do you have any thoughts/plans with plugin validation? [1][2][3] > > [1] - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-Janu > ary/110151.html > [2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/391594/ > [3] - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/driverlog-validation > > -- > Mike Perez > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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/20170124/43957e0c/attachment.html>