Hi Paul Sorry, I have missed this mail. The reason for putting -1 was the gating issue, so it is OK now.
PS Thank you for your rebasing this one 2014-02-16 16:43 GMT-08:00 Sumit Naiksatam <sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com>: > Hi Paul, > > Our plan with FWaaS was to get it to parity with LBaaS as far as STF > is concerned. That way any changes to STF can be explored in the > context of all services, and the migration can also be performed for > all services. Accordingly, Gary Duan has been actively working on the > patch: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60699/ > > and we hope to get it approved and merged soon. > > Thanks, > ~Sumit. > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Paul Michali <p...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Hi Nachi and other cores! >> >> I'm very close to publishing my vendor based VPNaaS driver (service driver >> is ready, device driver is a day or two out), but have a bit of an issue. >> This code uses the Service Type Framework, which, as you know, is still out >> for review (and has been idle for a long time). I updated the STF client >> code and it is updated in Gerrit. >> >> I saw you put a -1 on your STF server code. Is the feature being abandoned >> or was that for some other reason? >> >> If going forward with it, can you update the server STF code, or should I do >> it (I have a branch with the STF based on master of about 2 weeks ago, so it >> should update OK)? >> >> Also, I'm wondering (worried) about the logistics of my reviews. I wanted to >> do my service driver and device driver separately (I guess making the latter >> dependent on the former in Gerrit). However, because of the STF, I'd need to >> make my service driver dependent on the STF server code too (my current >> branch has both code pieces). Really worried about the complexity there and >> about it getting hung up, if there is more delay on the STF review. >> >> I've been working on another branch without the STF dependency, however that >> has to hack in part of the STF to be able to select the service driver based >> on config vs hardwired to the reference driver. >> >> Should I proceed with the STF review chaining or push out my code w/o the >> STF? >> >> Thanks! >> >> PCM (Paul Michali) >> >> MAIL p...@cisco.com >> IRC pcm_ (irc.freenode.net) >> TW @pmichali >> GPG key 4525ECC253E31A83 >> Fingerprint 307A 96BB 1A4C D2C7 931D 8D2D 4525 ECC2 53E3 1A83 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev