Dear Kenny and Mazin
I see today's TSC agenda item, "RT Catalog project proposal Vote".
As RTC project contactor, the following green lines are my three concerns,
which are still not gotten consensus in the ARC meeting.
My opinion is that RTC should be a project stand alone. I suggest we
cancel RTC vote as subproject. Thanks
The following are my concerns, which are copied from previous mail in the
ARC list in order to be easily read:
"
I have read the meeting notes of ARC January
30(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/January+30) . The following is three
concerns from me. If something is wrong, please correct me.
First: in last week TSC meeting, RTC is clear a stand alone project. TSC
give job to ARC to discuss the project software impact to other projects.
Before the ARC meeting, I arrange couple of meetings with Alex,
Jason, Michael, Ting and Sanjay, and also get the feedbacks and concerns from
them.
As I present the slide in the ARC, it well explained the software
impacts and the comminity concerns. If more concerns or new comments comes, we
can continue to discuss.
Second: in the ARC meeting, the subproject is talked again. Based on the R2
releasing, some people suggest RTC as subproject in R2, and in R3 make it as
separate project.
But now, RTC has not been approved, and will not be published
in the R2. So we just target on R3, and suggest RTC as a seperate project.
Third: I got some feedback from other companies, there are some other
technical choice on implementation. I think we need more work on details of the
technology selection to achieve the RT-Catalog. To encourage more contribution
and diversity of ONAP project, we suggest RT Catalog as a seperate project,
not a subproject.
"
BR
Maopeng
发件人：张茂鹏10030173
收件人： <christopher.don...@huawei.com>;
抄送人： <onap-...@lists.onap.org>; <djh...@us.ibm.com>;
日 期 ：2018年01月31日 23:20
主 题 ： [Onap-arc] About RT-Catalog meeting notes
Hi Chris
Add the topic name of email.
Thanks all for joining the RTC discussion.
BR
Maopeng
发件人：张茂鹏10030173
收件人： <christopher.don...@huawei.com>;
抄送人： <onap-...@lists.onap.org>;
日 期 ：2018年01月31日 17:24
主 题 ：[Onap-arc] (no subject)
_______________________________________________
Onap-arc mailing list
onap-...@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-arc
Hi Chris
I have read the meeting notes of ARC January
30(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/January+30) . The following is three
concerns from me. If something is wrong, please correct me.
First: in last week TSC meeting, RTC is clear a stand alone project. TSC
give job to ARC to discuss the project software impact to other projects.
Before the ARC meeting, I arrange couple of meetings with Alex,
Jason, Michael, Ting and Sanjay, and also get the feedbacks and concerns from
them.
As I present the slide in the ARC, it well explained the software
impacts and the comminity concerns. If more concerns or new comments comes, we
can continue to discuss.
Second: in the ARC meeting, the subproject is talked again. Based on the R2
releasing, some people suggest RTC as subproject in R2, and in R3 make it as
separate project.
But now, RTC has not been approved, and will not be published
in the R2. So we just target on R3, and suggest RTC as a seperate project.
Third: I got some feedback from other companies, there are some other
technical choice on implementation. I think we need more work on details of the
technology selection to achieve the RT-Catalog. To encourage more contribution
and diversity of ONAP project, we suggest RT Catalog as a seperate project,
not a subproject.
BR
Maopeng_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
