I agree. Also, as this does not preclude using the incubator when it is ready, this is a good way to start iterating on implementation in parallel with those issues being addressed by the community.
In my view, the issues raised around the incubator were significant enough (around packaging, handling of updates needed for horizon/heat/celiometer, handling of multiple feature branches, etc) that we we will probably need a design session in paris before a consensus will emerge around a solution for the incubator structure/usage. And if you are following the thread on nova for 'Averting the Nova crisis ...', the final consensus might actually BE to use separate stackforge project for plugins anyways, and in that case we will have a head start ;-) Regards, Mandeep ----- On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Prasad Vellanki < prasad.vella...@oneconvergence.com> wrote: > Sumit > Thanks for initiating this and also good discussion today on the IRC. > > My thoughts are that it is important to make this available to potential > users and customers as soon as possible so that we can get the necessary > feedback. Considering that the neutron cores and community are battling > nova parity and stability now, I would think it would be tough to get any > time for incubator or neutron feature branch any time soon. > I would think it would be better to move GBP into stackforge and then look > at incubator or neutron feature branch when available. > > prasadv > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Sumit Naiksatam <sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> There's been a lot of lively discussion on GBP a few weeks back and we >> wanted to drive forward the discussion on this a bit more. As you >> might imagine, we're excited to move this forward so more people can >> try it out. Here are the options: >> >> * Neutron feature branch: This presumably allows the GBP feature to be >> developed independently, and will perhaps help in faster iterations. >> There does seem to be a significant packaging issue [1] with this >> approach that hasn’t been completely addressed. >> >> * Neutron-incubator: This allows a path to graduate into Neutron, and >> will be managed by the Neutron core team. That said, the proposal is >> under discussion and there are still some open questions [2]. >> >> * Stackforge: This allows the GBP team to make rapid and iterative >> progress, while still leveraging the OpenStack infra. It also provides >> option of immediately exposing the existing implementation to early >> adopters. >> >> Each of the above options does not preclude moving to the other at a >> later time. >> >> Which option do people think is more preferable? >> >> (We could also discuss this in the weekly GBP IRC meeting on Thursday: >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy) >> >> Thanks! >> >> [1] >> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/044283.html >> [2] >> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/043577.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
