I was under the impression we did have a majority of cores in favor of the idea at the midcycle. But if this is a vote-vote, then I am a very strong +1 as well. This is something operators will absolutely want and and need.
Sam Yaple On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Michał Jastrzębski <inc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Strong +1 from me. This have multiple benefits: > Easier (aka possible) debugging of networking in running envs (not > having tools like tcpdump at your disposal is a pain) - granted, there > are ways to get this working without thin containers but require fair > amount of docker knowledge. > Docker daemon restart will not break routers - currently with docker > restart container with namespace dies and we lose our routers (they > will migrate using HA, but well, still a networking downtime). This > will no longer be the case so... > Upgrades with no vm downtime whatsoever depends on this one. > If we could deploy liberty code with all these nice stuff, I'd be > happier person;) > > Cheers, > Michal > > On 20 February 2016 at 07:40, Steven Dake (stdake) <std...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > Just clarifying, this is not a "revote" - there were not enough core > > reviewers in favor of this idea at the Kolla midcycle, so we need to > have a > > vote on the mailing list to sort out this policy decision of managing > > stable/liberty. > > > > Regards, > > -steve > > > > > > From: Steven Dake <std...@cisco.com> > > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > > Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 6:28 AM > > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > > Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] port neutron thin containers to > > stable/liberty > > > > Folks, > > > > There were not enough core reviewers to pass a majority approval of the > > neutron thin container backport idea, so we separated it out from fixing > > stable/liberty itself. > > > > I am going to keep voting open for *2* weeks this time. The reason for > the > > two weeks is I would like a week of discussion before people just blindly > > vote ;) > > > > Voting begins now and concludes March 4th. Since this is a policy > decision, > > no veto votes are permitted, just a +1 and a -1. Abstaining is the > same as > > voting –1. > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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