On 09/09/2014 06:57 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
Hi Jay,
The main component that won't work without direct integration is
enforcing policy on calls directly to Neutron and calls between the
plugins inside of Neutron. However, that's only one component of GBP.
All of the declarative abstractions, rendering of policy, etc can be
experimented with here in the stackforge project until the incubator is
figured out.
OK, thanks for the explanation Kevin, that helps!
Best,
-jay
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com
<mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 09/04/2014 12:07 AM, Sumit Naiksatam wrote:
Hi,
There's been a lot of lively discussion on GBP a few weeks back
and we
wanted to drive forward the discussion on this a bit more. As you
might imagine, we're excited to move this forward so more people can
try it out. Here are the options:
* Neutron feature branch: This presumably allows the GBP feature
to be
developed independently, and will perhaps help in faster iterations.
There does seem to be a significant packaging issue [1] with this
approach that hasn’t been completely addressed.
* Neutron-incubator: This allows a path to graduate into
Neutron, and
will be managed by the Neutron core team. That said, the proposal is
under discussion and there are still some open questions [2].
* Stackforge: This allows the GBP team to make rapid and iterative
progress, while still leveraging the OpenStack infra. It also
provides
option of immediately exposing the existing implementation to early
adopters.
Each of the above options does not preclude moving to the other
at a later time.
Which option do people think is more preferable?
(We could also discuss this in the weekly GBP IRC meeting on
Thursday:
https://wiki.openstack.org/__wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group___Policy
<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy>)
Thanks!
[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/__pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-__August/044283.html
<http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/044283.html>
[2]
http://lists.openstack.org/__pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-__August/043577.html
<http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/043577.html>
Hi all,
IIRC, Kevin was saying to me in IRC that GBP really needs to live
in-tree due to it needing access to various internal plugin points
and to be able to call across different plugin layers/drivers inside
of Neutron.
If this is the case, how would the stackforge GBP project work if it
wasn't a fork of Neutron in its entirety?
Just curious,
-jay
_________________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
--
Kevin Benton
_______________________________________________
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
