Michael Still wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Fox, Kevin M <kevin....@pnnl.gov <mailto:kevin....@pnnl.gov>> wrote:[snip] The issue is, as I see it, a parallel activity to one of the that is currently accepted into the Big Tent, aka Containerized Deployment [snip] This seems to be the crux of the matter as best as I can tell. Is it true to say that the concern is that Kolla believes they "own" the containerized deployment space inside the Big Tent? Whether to have competing projects in the big tent was debated by the TC at the time and my recollection is that we decided that was a good thing -- if someone wanted to develop a Nova replacement, then let them do it in public with the community. It would either win or lose based on its merits. Why is this not something which can happen here as well?
For real, I (or someone) can start a nova replacement without getting rejected (or yelled at or ...) by the TC saying it's a competing project??? Wow, this is news to me...
I guess I should also point out that there is at least one other big tent deployment tool deploying containerized openstack components now, so its not like this idea is unique or new. Perhaps using kubernetes makes it different somehow, but I don't see it. Michael -- Rackspace Australia __________________________________________________________________________ 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
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
