>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> In particular, has there been a decision made about whether it will >>>> definitely be deprecated in some (as yet unspecified) future release, or >>>> whether it will continue to be supported for the foreseeable future? >>> >>> We want to deprecate it. There are some things blocking moving forward >>> with this. In short: >>> >>> 1) Feature parity (primarily something that satisfies performance and HA >>> requirements addressed by nova-network in multi-host mode) >>> >>> 2) Testing and quality parity. The status of Neutron testing in the >>> gate is far inferior to the testing done against nova-network. >>> >>> I'm personally more worried about #2 than #1 at this point. >>> >>> A major issue is that very few people actually stepped up and agreed to >>> help with #2 at the summit [2]. Only one person signed up to work on >>> tempest issues. Nobody signed up to help with grenade. If this doesn't >>> happen, nova-network can't be deprecated, IMO. >>> >>> If significant progress isn't made ASAP this cycle, and ideally by >>> mid-cycle so we can change directions if necessary, then we'll have to >>> discuss what next step to take. That may include un-freezing >>> nova-network so that various people holding on to enhancements to >>> nova-network can start submitting them back. It's a last resort, but I >>> consider it on the table.
Another approach to help with (1) is in Icehouse we remove the features from nova-network that neutron does not implement. We have warned about deprecation for a good few releases, so its almost OK. But that somewhat assumes (2) is still going well. John _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev