> Hi, > > I haven’t read through those (need to go spend time with family so replying > quickly) but given the dates the planning phases for Quantum/Neutron LBaaS > and Libra LBaaS were at the same time. > > There was an internal evaluation of the current LBaaS solutions done at the > time and it was believed by the people evaluating that Atlas was a good > place to start. I came in just as that evaluation had finished (late August > 2012) and the decision was pretty much made. In retrospect I may have > personally gone the Mirantis LBaaS as a starting point. But either way there > were some good starting places. > > Libra was initially a few trees so history is hard to track, but we had > something in production by December that year. > > In response to Alex, the Libra team in HP is growing (it is currently still > pretty small) and that should help us have more engineers to work with the > Neutron team. The current goal is to get 5.x out of the door which adds > things like metering/billing support and then planning how we can integrate > well with Neutron. I believe the Libra team have a few diagrams flying > around on a mutually beneficial way of doing that.
Hi Andrew, Thanks for the all the responses. I certainly didn't want to throw the blame at one of the team, but I think we should try to converge. In particular Neutron LBaaS would benefit greatly from having a big deployment like HP. I hope the 2 teams can find a way to collaborate. There are benefits to have a different endpoint like Libra proposes, although now that LBaaS is integrated in Neutron it's going to be difficult to change. There is a tension in OpenStack currently between keeping the projects lean (by having small, independent code bases) and making deployments easy (by not having to deploy dozens of projects). I feel we haven't found a great answer yet. -- Thomas _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
