OK, lets go with that, though given how packed Juno-3 is, I'd lean towards working out the kinks and architecture here and then we circle back for Kilo and get this work approved and moving forward. We can chat in August if by chance major progress is made.
Thanks, Kyle On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > That would be my thinking as well, but if we managed to make an impressive > progress from now until the Feature Freeze proposal deadline, I'd be willing > to reevaluate the situation. > > A. > > > On 21 July 2014 12:13, Kyle Mestery <mest...@mestery.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I think the specs under the umbrella one can be approved/treated >> > individually. >> > >> > The umbrella one is an informational blueprint, there is not going to be >> > code associated with it, however before approving it (and the individual >> > ones) we'd need all the parties interested in vsphere support for >> > Neutron to >> > reach an agreement as to what the code will look like so that the >> > individual >> > contributions being proposed are not going to clash with each other or >> > create needless duplication. >> > >> That's what I was thinking as well. So, given where we're at in Juno, >> I'm leaning towards having all of this consensus building happen now >> and we can start the Kilo cycle with these BPs in agreement from all >> contributors. >> >> Does that sound ok? >> >> Thanks, >> Kyle >> >> > >> > >> > >> > On 21 July 2014 06:11, Kyle Mestery <mest...@mestery.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Gary Kotton <gkot...@vmware.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> >> > I would like to propose the following for spec freeze exception: >> >> > >> >> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105369 >> >> > >> >> > This is an umbrella spec for a number of VMware DVS support specs. >> >> > Each >> >> > has >> >> > its own unique use case and will enable a lot of existing VMware DVS >> >> > users >> >> > to start to use OpenStack. >> >> > >> >> > For https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102720/ we have the following >> >> > which >> >> > we >> >> > can post when the internal CI for the NSX-v is ready (we are >> >> > currently >> >> > working on this): >> >> > - core plugin functionality >> >> > - layer 3 support >> >> > - security group support >> >> > >> >> Do we need to approve all the "under the umbrella" specs as well? >> >> >> >> > Thanks >> >> > Gary >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list >> >> > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list >> > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
