On 08/06/2014 07:54 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
I'm curious, how would having Nova reviewers look at this have helped?

As I mentioned on a previous email, Nova is the pre-eminent consumer of Neutron's API.

Best,
-jay

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com
<mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    On 08/06/2014 07:08 PM, CARVER, PAUL wrote:

        On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Mohammad Banikazemi <m...@us.ibm.com
        <mailto:m...@us.ibm.com><mailto:mb@us.__ibm.com
        <mailto:m...@us.ibm.com>>>
           wrote:

            Yes, indeed.
            I do not want to be over dramatic but the discussion on the
            original "Group
            Based Policy and the way forward" thread is nothing short of
            heartbreaking.
            After months and months of discussions, three presentations
            at the past three
            summits, a design session at the last summit, and (most
            relevant to this
            thread) the approval of the spec, why are we talking about
            the merits of the
            work now?

            I understand if people think this is not a good idea or this
            is not a good
            time. What I do not understand is why these concerns were
            not raised clearly
            and openly earlier.


        I have to agree here. I'm not sure whether my organization needs
        GBP or not.
        It's certainly not our top priority for Neutron given a variety
        of other more
        important functional gaps. However, I saw their demo at the
        summit and it was
        clear that a lot of work had gone into it even before Icehouse.
         From the demo
        it was clearly a useful enhancement to Neutron even if it wasn't
        at the top
        of my priority list.

        For people to be asking to justify the "why" this far into the
        Juno cycle
        when the spec was approved and the code was demoed at the summit
        really
        brings the OpenStack process into question. It's one thing to
        discuss
        technical merits of contributions but it's totally different to
        pull the rug
        out from under a group of contributors at the last minute after
        such a long
        period of development, discussion, and demo.

        Seeing this sort of last minute rejection of a contribution
        after so much
        time has been invested in it could very easily have a chilling
        effect on
        contributors.


    I don't disagree with you, Paul.

    I blame myself for not paying the attention I should have to this
    earlier in the process.

    FWIW, I had a good conversation with Sumit and Kevin on
    #openstack-neutron this afternoon about this particular topic. We
    agree on some things; disagree on others.

    Bottom line, I go back to what I said in a previous email: the Nova
    and Neutron development teams need to do a much better job in being
    directly involved in each other's spec discussions and design
    conversations.

    Best,
    -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

Reply via email to