Can someone do a small little Visio or other visual to explain what's being proposed here? My head sported a small crack at around the 5-6th page...
; ) But seriously, I couldn't understand the proposal. Maybe I'm not the audience which is fine, just saying, the words got in the way. Sounds like a song! *Adam Lawson* AQORN, Inc. 427 North Tatnall Street Ste. 58461 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-2230 Toll-free: (844) 4-AQORN-NOW ext. 101 International: +1 302-387-4660 Direct: +1 916-246-2072 On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:46 AM, John Griffith <john.griff...@solidfire.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> > wrote: > >> Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: >> > Great writeup. I think there are some great concrete suggestions here. >> > >> > A couple more: >> > >> > 1. I think we need a better name for Layer #1 that actually represents >> what the goal of it is: Infrastructure Services? >> > 2. We need to be be open to having other Layer #1s within the >> community. We should allow for similar collaborations and group focus to >> grow up as well. Storage Services? Platform Services? Computation Services? >> >> I think that would nullify most of the benefits of Monty's proposal. If >> we keep on blessing "themes" or special groups, we'll soon be back at >> step 0, with projects banging on the TC door to become special, and >> companies not allocating resources to anything that's not special. >> >> -- >> Thierry Carrez (ttx) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > Great stuff, mixed on point 2 raised by Vish but honestly I think that's > something that could evolve over time, but I looked at that differently as > in Cinder, SWIFT and some day Manilla live under a Storage Services > umbrella, and ideally at some point there's some convergence there. > > Anyway, I don't want to start a rat-hole on that, it's kind of irrelevant > right now. Bottom line is I think the direction and initial ideas in > Monty's post are what a lot of us have been thinking about and looking for. > I'm in!! > > > _______________________________________________ > 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