Wouldn’t this be true of anybody who is serious developer in open contrail. Either they have need for a feature in their cloud or they are getting a fat check. For Speed of development they will have private fork.
However it is in their interest to sync with main branch, otherwise they lose the benefit of community. So I would not be worried about it. Regards -Harshad > On Sep 26, 2017, at 7:44 AM, Jakub Pavlik <jpav...@mirantis.com> wrote: > > +1 to Robert > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net > <mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>> wrote: > Greg, > > The moment marketing will bring a check with the money the feature will be > implemented by Juniper and it will ship regardless who says what outside of > that. > > So you have only two choices here .. > > * Let Juniper marketing drive the features and keep single code base > > or > > * Split Open Contrail into two independent code branches one driven by > Juniper and one pure open source which pretty soon will be incompatible with > each other. > > Cheers, > R. > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net > <mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>> wrote: > Greg, > > > Can you think of a candidate who can dictate architecture both to Juniper > > internal engineering and all other community participants? How’s your spare > > time now-a-days? > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Gregory Elkinbard <gelkinb...@juniper.net > <mailto:gelkinb...@juniper.net>> wrote: > Harshad, > while in general I agree. It is simply too hard to find such. Since Linus and > Vish are not applying for the job I am afraid that an attempt to impose such > as system, may lead to what I experienced while Nicira led Neutron. I would > not call that benign. > > > > Do you remember Bill Jolitz by any chance? Then you understand my concern > about handing the keys over. BSD386 kicked Linux ass when they both came out. > Linux was just barely more functional then Minux, yet it put BSD386 into the > ground in less than 1 year. Sun’s ARB worked ok for every Berkley ass on it, > there was a kindly mentor who would help you understand what your code should > be, creating a counter balance. > > > > If we find the right candidate we can reorganize the ARB around a chief > architect with assistants to help carry the load. So far no volunteers > internally from Juniper. Can you think of a candidate who can dictate > architecture both to Juniper internal engineering and all other community > participants? How’s your spare time now-a-days? > > > > Thanks > > Greg > > > > > > From: Dev <dev-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org > <mailto:dev-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org>> on behalf of Harshad Nakil > <hna...@gmail.com <mailto:hna...@gmail.com>> > Date: Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:49 PM > To: "Gasparakis, Joseph" <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com > <mailto:joseph.gaspara...@intel.com>> > Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org <mailto:dev@lists.opencontrail.org>> > > > Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - > PLEASE VOTE > > > > IMHO architecture board does not work and design by committee does not work. > > You really need a benevolent dictator. > > Regards > > -Harshad > > > > > On Sep 24, 2017, at 7:34 PM, Gasparakis, Joseph <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com > <mailto:joseph.gaspara...@intel.com>> wrote: > > Thank you all. Clearly option is the winner, and this is the direction we > take moving forward, thank you all for your voting. Voting is now closed. > > > > Regards, > > > > Joseph > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: gu...@certusnet.com.cn <mailto:gu...@certusnet.com.cn> > Date: 9/23/17 03:17 (GMT-08:00) > > To: "Gasparakis, Joseph" <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com > <mailto:joseph.gaspara...@intel.com>>, dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org > <mailto:dev@lists.opencontrail.org>> > > Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - > PLEASE VOTE > > > > Hi, > > Support option #2. > > > > Regards > > Gengliang Guo > > > > From: Gasparakis, Joseph <mailto:joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> > Date: 2017-09-20 03:34 > > To: 'dev@lists.opencontrail.org' <mailto:dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > Subject: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE > VOTE > > Hi all, > > > > Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have > for the first public release more control than others since they have all the > knowledge and it makes sense for them to be able to prevent radical > architectural changes. > > > > In the last TSC WG call we came up with a few proposals: > > > > 1. Allow someone in Juniper have veto powers to reject a proposed change > > 2. Create an Architectural Review Board (ARB as defined > inhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1zNIVEOY3XsnUdYKy1ddwgjJoOV-Iwx1pHU_8ViYlTFs/edit > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1zNIVEOY3XsnUdYKy1ddwgjJoOV-2DIwx1pHU-5F8ViYlTFs_edit&d=DwMCaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=VQrMBvKeploIeBocya36pOwODBVDvmbjFqFgowqJuhs&m=9TFxAtQI_7jSQ2oa1xI7ets0wS_J49PN6d5qWwwVBn8&s=qvV9qp2w3N36Lg5uaVH2QzdUKHdJjOe0teYOjavDCgg&e=>) > that will be reviewing in order to accept or reject architectural proposals, > and Juniper to have the majority of the seats so they can control by the > power of majority what goes in and what not. > > > > If we decide for 2, we can choose at a later stage if we will have an ARB > ongoing or only for this first release. > > > > Please vote one of the two options and for the sake of openness and > transparency REPLY ALL so your vote is visible to the whole list. If I > receive any private votes I will be forwarding them to this list. > > > > Also please vote by end of day today as we would like to have this decision > made during the summit tomorrow. > > > > Regards, > > > > Joseph > > > > -- > > <image002(09-23-18-15-40).png> > > Joseph Gasparakis > > Intel Corporation > > Networking Platforms Group > > Architecture Division > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@lists.opencontrail.org <mailto:Dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.opencontrail.org_mailman_listinfo_dev-5Flists.opencontrail.org&d=DwMCaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=VQrMBvKeploIeBocya36pOwODBVDvmbjFqFgowqJuhs&m=9TFxAtQI_7jSQ2oa1xI7ets0wS_J49PN6d5qWwwVBn8&s=X9ai0GdDLCNzU4vd3-Fl3XRdqhUSYBPghyB_Abskb3Y&e=> > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@lists.opencontrail.org <mailto:Dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org > <http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@lists.opencontrail.org <mailto:Dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org > <http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org> > > > > > -- > Jakub Pavlik > +420 602 177 027 > jpav...@mirantis.com <mailto:jpav...@mirantis.com> > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@lists.opencontrail.org > http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.opencontrail.org http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/dev_lists.opencontrail.org
