On 19 March 2015 at 11:44, Gary Kotton <gkot...@vmware.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> Just the fact that we did this does not make it right. But I guess that we
> are starting to bend the rules. I think that we really need to be far more
> diligent about this kind of stuff. Having said that we decided the
> following on IRC:
> 1. Mtu will be left in the core (all plugins should be aware of this and
> treat it if necessary)
> 2. Vlan-transparency will be moved to an extension. Pritesh is working on
> this.
>

The spec started out as an extension, and in its public review people
requested that it not be an extension and that it should instead be core.
I accept that we can change our minds, but I believe there should be a good
reason for doing so.  You haven't given that reason here and you haven't
even said who the 'we' is that decided this.  Also, as the spec author, I
had a conversation with you all but there was no decision at the end of it
(I presume that came afterward) and I feel that I have a reasonable right
to be involved.  Could you at least summarise your reasoning here?

I admit that I prefer this to be in core, but I'm not terribly choosy and
that's not why I'm asking.  I'm more concerned that this is changing our
mind at literally the last moment, and in turn wasting a developer's time,
when there was a perfectly good process to debate this before coding was
begun, and again when the code was up for review, both of which apparently
failed.  I'd like to understand how we avoid getting here again in the
future.  I'd also like to be certain we are not simply reversing a choice
on a whim.
-- 
Ian.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to