On 02/05/2016 10:36 AM, Neil Jerram wrote: > As some others have said, I see the current discussion as being about > the chain of accountability, from a stadium project, through Neutron, up > to the OpenStack TC and board. IIUC, Armando and other cores feel that > there is a gap there - because they can't reasonably understand and > vouch for all the stadium projects to the same standard they can for > core Neutron. Plus it seems (from the current > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275888/9 text) that there is a desire > for strong core team overlap between openstack/neutron and all Neutron > stadium projects. > > As the lead of networking-calico, I think it's a reasonable call to say > that networking-calico (and similar projects) should therefore be > OpenStack big tent projects, rather than Neutron stadium, and hence the > reviews I've just left.
Thanks, Neil. You've summarized this well. A more clear and accurate chain of accountability is indeed what we're trying to get to here. -- Russell Bryant __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev