Hi Petr, I think you bring-up some interesting points. Let me give my perspective on those
1) new platforms are always less optimized, I am not concerned about that, time will show. First designs are made for good architecture, not for optimized operation, that come later. I have seen too many system designs, which were optimized for performance or operation, which failed to deliver. 2) On the platform topic, ONAP has been shown to work for diverse set of use cases, so from that perspective I guess it is good enough of a platform. 3) I believe where you have a point is that several projects reused in ONAP might need to be well separated out and more used then developed into them (or those requirements should be Brough upstream. 4) Also I believe that some choices of tools and components could be revised in view of many external projects meanwhile have more matured over time, but they were not available or immature at the time the decisions have been taken. Kind regards, Marcus -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#18062): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/18062 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/32429722/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
