Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

Agree with Greg, single code base is better. Regards Gengliang Guo From: Gregory Elkinbard Date: 2017-09-27 02:42 To: Harshad Nakil; Jakub Pavlik CC: dev Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE While Juniper engineering may develop an occasional

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

...@lists.opencontrail.org] On Behalf Of Harshad Nakil Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 14:13 To: Jakub Pavlik <jpav...@mirantis.com> Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE Wouldn’t this be true of anybody who is serio

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

017 at 11:42 AM To: Harshad Nakil <hna...@gmail.com> Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE It is in their interest to sync, but don't forget that accepting such sync is subject to Archte

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

m> Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE Wouldn’t this be true of anybody who is serious developer in open contrail. Either they have need for a feature in their cloud or they are getting a fat check. For Speed of de

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

;> >>>> If we find the right candidate we can reorganize the ARB around a chief >>>> architect with assistants to help carry the load. So far no volunteers >>>> internally from Juniper. Can you think of a candidate who can dictate >>>> architectu

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

.opencontrail.org> on behalf of Harshad > Nakil <hna...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:49 PM > *To: *"Gasparakis, Joseph" <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> > *Cc: *dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > > *Subject: *Re: [opencontrail-de

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

ev-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org> on behalf of Harshad Nakil > <hna...@gmail.com> > Date: Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:49 PM > To: "Gasparakis, Joseph" <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> > Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> > Subject: Re: [opencontr

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

"Gasparakis, Joseph" <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> Cc: dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE IMHO architecture board does not work and design by committee does not work. You really need a ben

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

, Joseph <joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> Cc: gu...@certusnet.com.cn; dev <dev@lists.opencontrail.org> Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE IMHO architecture board does not work and design by committee does not work. You really need a benevol

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

#2 On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Gasparakis, Joseph < joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have > for the first public release more control than others since they have all > the knowledge and it makes sense

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

ontrail.org> Subject: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE Hi all, Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have for the first public release more control than others since they have all the knowledge and it makes sense

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

2 On 20.09.2017 00:34, Gasparakis, Joseph wrote: Hi all, Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have for the first public release more control than others since they have all the knowledge and it makes sense for them to be able to prevent radical architectural

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

ent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 12:34:53 PM To: 'dev@lists.opencontrail.org' Subject: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE Hi all, Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have for the first public release more control than others since t

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

2 From: Dev [mailto:dev-boun...@lists.opencontrail.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Pavlik Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 12:43 PM To: Gasparakis, Joseph Cc: dev@lists.opencontrail.org Subject: Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE 2 On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:34

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

2 On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Gasparakis, Joseph < joseph.gaspara...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have > for the first public release more control than others since they have all > the knowledge and it makes sense

Re: [opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

2 Le 19 sept. 2017 21:35, "Gasparakis, Joseph" a écrit : > Hi all, > > > > Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have > for the first public release more control than others since they have all > the knowledge and it makes sense

[opencontrail-dev] [TSC WG] Transitioning to open source - PLEASE VOTE

Hi all, Transitioning into an open source model it makes sense for Juniper to have for the first public release more control than others since they have all the knowledge and it makes sense for them to be able to prevent radical architectural changes. In the last TSC WG call we came up with a