On 21 August 2014 12:12, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote:

> Let the ones that are primarily interested in
> good quality of that code (vendors) to drive development. And if some
> plugins become garbage, it's bad news for specific vendors; if neutron
> screws because of lack of concentration on core features and open
> source plugins, everyone is doomed.
>

Completely agree with this sentiment. Is there a crisp distinction between
a "vendor" plugin and an "open source" plugin though?

The Snabb NFV (http://snabb.co/nfv.html) driver superficially looks like a
vendor plugin but is actually completely open source. The development is
driven by end-user organisations who want to make the standard upstream
Neutron support their NFV use cases.

We are looking for a good way to engage with the upstream community. In
this cycle we have found kindred spirits in the NFV subteam., but we did
not find a good way to engage with Neutron upstream (see
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/116476/). It would be wonderful if there
is a suitable process available for us to use in Kilo e.g. incubation.

Cheers,
-Luke
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to