Hello Dan & netstack people,
replies inline.
On 29 June 2012 07:50, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Ryota from NEC sent an email to the list earlier tonight about pushing
> their NEC Quantum plugin (currently hosted outside of the main Quantum
> repo), into the main Quantum repo. As some
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 07:50:30AM +0100, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Ryota from NEC sent an email to the list earlier tonight about pushing their
> NEC Quantum plugin (currently hosted outside of the main Quantum repo), into
> the main Quantum repo. As some of you will recall, at the F
I think it's fair to expect that, for a plugin to be in the community repo, it
be maintained by at least one core dev. Also, in cases where a new plugin is
being introduced by new contributors, at least one of them can be promoted to
core dev (if none of the existing core devs take responsibilit
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Sumit Naiksatam (snaiksat) <
snaik...@cisco.com> wrote:
> I think it’s fair to expect that, for a plugin to be in the community
> repo, it be maintained by at least one core dev. Also, in cases where a new
> plugin is being introduced by new contributors, at least
On 29 June 2012 09:51, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Sumit Naiksatam (snaiksat) <
> snaik...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it’s fair to expect that, for a plugin to be in the community
>> repo, it be maintained by at least one core dev. Also, in cases where a new
>
On Jun 29, 2012, at 1:50 AM, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Ryota from NEC sent an email to the list earlier tonight about pushing their
> NEC Quantum plugin (currently hosted outside of the main Quantum repo), into
> the main Quantum repo. As some of you will recall, at the Folsom summ
Hi Dan,
I checked a thread "[Netstack] requirements for quantum plugins". That's makes
sense. I understand that we are expected to
contribute not only our own plugin and "must be" core dev with
responsibilities. I will catch up community current activities and
find something to contribute that
Hi,
With the advent of V2 do we want to continue to support V1?
- Yes:
- Do we want separate plugins or as Bob suggested have the V2
plugin support V1 requests? V2 support for V1 may require changes in the
database. In addition to this we do not have a database upgrade.
- No:
Hi Gary,
Based on discussions during the last team meeting, I had created a BP to
discuss this in F-3 (
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/remove-v1-related-code),
though admittedly the work on the OVS + LB plugins in F-2 certainly also
raises the question.
My bias is toward removing
I agree with all your points here Dan. Lets not take any sort of upgrade hit
now, given the constraints on the V1 API you point out below. Going forward
post V2, upgrades will need to be taken into account.
On Jun 29, 2012, at 11:54 AM, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> Based on discussions
On 06/29/2012 12:54 PM, Dan Wendlandt wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> Based on discussions during the last team meeting, I had created a BP to
> discuss this in F-3
> (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/remove-v1-related-code),
> though admittedly the work on the OVS + LB plugins in F-2 certainl
Hi Ryota,
Great to hear that you'll be more involved in Quantum community activities.
One way to buld up some good community experience is to help out with
existing reviews or fixing a low-hanging-fruit bug. I've updated your F-3
blueprint to "approved", operating under the assumption that you w
12 matches
Mail list logo
