From previous discussion, it appeared the proposer really felt this needed
to be a core neutron aspect.
Where by core they meant both be part of the core API and part of
openstack/neutron.
On the other hand, we also agreed that the best way forward was to develop
a service plugin which in a way
On 2/24/2015 6:47 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
More seriously, have you considered starting a tap-as-a-service project on
stackforge now that the services split has established a framework for
advanced services? Uploading the code you are using to do it is a great way
to get people motivated to try
There is a -2 (from me). And this was done from the auto-abandon script
which I try to run once a month.
As Kevin said, the suggestion multiple times was to do a StackForge project
for this work, that's the best way forward here.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:01 PM, CARVER, PAUL pc2...@att.com
Maybe I'm misreading review.o.o, but I don't see the -2. There was a -2 from
Salvatore Orlando with the comment The -2 on this patch is only to deter
further comments and a link to 140292, but 140292 has a comment from Kyle
saying it's been abandoned in favor of going back to 96149. Are we in a
I think Kyle's auto-abandon script made a mistake in this case, unless it
was seeing into the future and saw it's own -2... :)
More seriously, have you considered starting a tap-as-a-service project on
stackforge now that the services split has established a framework for
advanced services?
