On 21 August 2014 12:12, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Let the ones that are primarily interested in > good quality of that code (vendors) to drive development. And if some > plugins become garbage, it's bad news for specific vendors; if neutron > screws because of lack of concentration on core features and open > source plugins, everyone is doomed. > Completely agree with this sentiment. Is there a crisp distinction between a "vendor" plugin and an "open source" plugin though? The Snabb NFV (http://snabb.co/nfv.html) driver superficially looks like a vendor plugin but is actually completely open source. The development is driven by end-user organisations who want to make the standard upstream Neutron support their NFV use cases. We are looking for a good way to engage with the upstream community. In this cycle we have found kindred spirits in the NFV subteam., but we did not find a good way to engage with Neutron upstream (see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116476/). It would be wonderful if there is a suitable process available for us to use in Kilo e.g. incubation. Cheers, -Luke
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
