|
Hi,
Abhijit
I am sorry.
About the present in the TSC meeting, August 16 may be inconvenient for us. The time may conflict for some of my team members. So I
need to discuss with them about the time. Once fixing the time ,I
will post the mail to you and the TSC.
Thanks. Glend
Adding Daya to thread. Added the TSC as well.
Glend,
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks, Abhijit
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
Hi, Daya
We plan to use netconf to configure other
devices and some private api for special third party devices in the future. Current netconf is not implemented
in our HNI module and it is mainly based on openflow. We can consider your
suggestion that
these devices are configured via netvirt.
The arp module
of netvirt can response the vm of openstack platform. But HNI may involve other
platforms such as vmware platform. Netvirt can not response the vm of vmware
platform. One function of HNI is to connect the vlan network of vmware platform
and the vxlan network of the openstack platform. So the arp module can response
for the vms of vmware platform. When users send the rpc request to the
controller, HNI can get all the vms information of openstack network and vmware
network that users want to connect. Then the arp module of HNI writes the arp
response flow tables to the ovs.
Glend Thanks
Thanks sam.
Glend, a few more questions from me.
ODL has the netvirt service today which can configure a hwvtep today via ovsdb based on openstack l2gw configuration.
It looks like semantically, you are looking at extending a similar operation to other devices via netconf. So, it could potentially be an extension of the netvirt service,
or if you create a netconf schema for these devices, these could be stitched via netvirt as well.
Wrt. the ARP module, again netvirt has some services where an auto-ARP responder is programmed inside OVS for router interfaces.
Netvirt is also able to learn from vm grat ARPs, and arp responses for unknown IPs.
Can you please provide more clarity on the scope of the new arp module, will it be a stand alone service, and what are the scenarios in which it will work.
Thanks,
daya
From: Sam Hague [mailto:shague@...]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2018 6:01 PM
To: Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...>
Cc: TSC <tsc@...>; glendren12@...; project-proposals <project-proposals@...aylight.org>; Dayavanti Gopal Kamath <dayavanti.gopal.kamath@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [Project-proposals] New project proposed
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present
it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal?
(2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage
to write their extension for the device?
(3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ?
(4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)?
(5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall
architecture.
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...ylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...ylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
Hi,Anil
(1)
Current we are not considering Kubernetes networking support/extension. But
your suggestion is a good idea. We can put it in the next step.
(2)
The netconf、private
api Is the interfaces we reserve for some special third party devices in the
future. It is not real implemented. At present, we are mainly based on the OVS.
(3)
TSDR and message bus are also the reserved function for future. We plan to use TSDR
to automatically collect data, such as resource, connection, status and so on, to
realize monitoring, problem location, performance optimization and so on and
use message bus to support some external orchestrator such as monitoring
platform.
Now
the core function of HNI is mainly based on flow table.
Glend Thanks
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
--
|
|
|
Dayavanti Gopal Kamath <dayavanti.gopal.kamath@...>
Thanks sam.
Glend, a few more questions from me.
ODL has the netvirt service today which can configure a hwvtep today via ovsdb based on openstack l2gw configuration.
It looks like semantically, you are looking at extending a similar operation to other devices via netconf. So, it could potentially be an extension of the netvirt service,
or if you create a netconf schema for these devices, these could be stitched via netvirt as well.
Wrt. the ARP module, again netvirt has some services where an auto-ARP responder is programmed inside OVS for router interfaces.
Netvirt is also able to learn from vm grat ARPs, and arp responses for unknown IPs.
Can you please provide more clarity on the scope of the new arp module, will it be a stand alone service, and what are the scenarios in which it will work.
Thanks,
daya
From: Sam Hague [mailto:shague@...]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2018 6:01 PM
To: Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...>
Cc: TSC <tsc@...>; glendren12@...; project-proposals <project-proposals@...>; Dayavanti Gopal Kamath <dayavanti.gopal.kamath@...>
Subject: Re: [Project-proposals] New project proposed
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 1:56 PM Abhijit Kumbhare < abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present
it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal?
(2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage
to write their extension for the device?
(3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ?
(4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)?
(5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall
architecture.
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Added the TSC as well.
Glend,
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks, Abhijit
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Glend,
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks, Abhijit
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
Glend,
There is a 2 week review period for project proposals so that folks can ask questions over the email and after which you can come and present the project to the TSC for approval. Since you proposed it today, you will be eligible to present it on Aug 16. Will it be possible for you or a project representative to come and present the project in the Aug 16 meeting? Details of the TSC meetings including the conference call info are here:
Thanks, Abhijit
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
--
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
|
|
|
Hi Glend,
Thanks for the project proposal. I have few quick questions
(1) Although it's not mentioned in the project proposal, but are you considering Kubernetes networking support/extension also as a part of this project proposal? (2) Seems like you are planning to use netconf to configure VTEP on some non-hwvtep complient devices, is there any specific devices that you are planning to target ? or are you planning to provide a framework that any vendor can leverage to write their extension for the device? (3) Architecture diagram shows "private api" can you please shed some more light on it ? (4) Also i see TSDR project in the architecture, can you please explain a bit about it's use in the architecture (is it a secondary persistence for monitoring data of the tunnels)? (5) Also it shows integration with message bus, is there a plan to integrate this architecture with some external data store or to integrate it with any external orchestrator? Just want to understand the use of this message bus in the overall architecture.
Thanks Anil
|
|
|
Hi: we propose a project to the opendaylight committee. Here is the reference
I am looking forwards your replay. Thanks.
|
|
|
Hi: we propose a project to the opendaylight committee. Here is the reference
I am looking forwards your replay. Thanks.
Best regards!
|
|
|
Attention TSC members: New Project Proposal - ServiceUtils (genius repo split) - vote on June 14 TSC meeting?
Hi TSC members,
For a new project proposal , the TSC review is supposed to be two weeks after it has been proposed so that the TSC members have a chance to review it first. In this case, this was brought up to be discussed in the TSC meeting of May 31 (two weeks ago) as an additional repo within Genius. In the May 31 meeting, we managed to only briefly discuss this but some members (Robert & Luis) felt it may be better to have this as a separate project. It was decided to continue the discussion in the TWS of June 4, where in it was decided to have this as a separate project.
Hence I am willing to consider the two weeks notice period to start from May 31 (when this was first brought up) and have it up for a vote in tomorrow's TSC meeting i.e. June 14 - unless some TSC member is opposed and wants more time to review it. I will put it for the agenda tomorrow - in case any TSC member disagrees I will move it to the next week TSC meeting.
Please respond to this email thread in case you are opposed to having a vote in the meeting tomorrow i.e. June 14.
Faseela or someone knowledgeable about the project proposal - please attend the meeting tomorrow to answer any questions regarding the proposal that may be asked.
Hi,
As discussed in last TSC call, we presented the scope of the SRM feature which is currently in GENIUS, at TWS.
The decision was to spin off a separate project, starting with SRM, and other utils if any in Genius which SRM depends on, to enable the smooth usage of this functionality across applications.
The project proposal can be seen below, please let us know when we can have a creation review at TSC for the same.
https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ServiceUtils
Please do let me know, whether I should raise a helpdesk request and get the repo created and migrate code, before we can do a creation review.
Thanks,
Faseela
|
|
|
New Project Proposal - ServiceUtils (genius repo split)
Faseela K <faseela.k@...>
Hi,
As discussed in last TSC call, we presented the scope of the SRM feature which is currently in GENIUS, at TWS.
The decision was to spin off a separate project, starting with SRM, and other utils if any in Genius which SRM depends on, to enable the smooth usage of this functionality across applications.
The project proposal can be seen below, please let us know when we can have a creation review at TSC for the same.
https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ServiceUtils
Please do let me know, whether I should raise a helpdesk request and get the repo created and migrate code, before we can do a creation review.
Thanks,
Faseela
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Andrew Grimberg
I would strongly recommend that the repo and package name line up. Not
doing so breaks all of the other standards we've got in ODL around
artifact naming.
-Andy-
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 06/06/2018 08:40 AM, Thanh Ha wrote: Agreed. When looking at ODL's Gerrit system it's obvious that this is an
ODL project however when looking from PyPi that wouldn't be obvious at all.
We could have supporttools as the repo name, but deploy to PyPi as
odltools though but then there's a mismatch in name to repo.
Regards,
Thanh
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Sam Hague <shague@...
<mailto:shague@...>> wrote:
Can we stay with odltools? These tools are installed via pip install
odltools so it is better if it has odl in the package name.
Adding support doesnt add much as tools implies the same.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 10:02 AM Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...
<mailto:jluhrsen@...>> wrote:
I'm good with 'supporttools'
JamO
On 6/6/18 3:03 AM, Michael Vorburger wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@...
<mailto:nite@...> <mailto:nite@... <mailto:nite@...>>> wrote:
>
> Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch?
>
>
> +1 to supporttools, that's more specific than "[odl]tools"
which could be anything and everything.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via
the Orange Network
> *From:* shague@... <mailto:shague@...>
<mailto:shague@... <mailto:shague@...>>
> *Sent:* June 6, 2018 02:30
> *To:* jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>
<mailto:jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>>
> *Cc:* nite@... <mailto:nite@...> <mailto:nite@...
<mailto:nite@...>>; project-proposals@...
<mailto:project-proposals@...>
> <mailto:project-proposals@...
<mailto:project-proposals@...>>;
tsc@... <mailto:tsc@...>
<mailto:tsc@...
<mailto:tsc@...>>
> *Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] [OpenDaylight TSC] Project
proposal for "ODLTools"
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen
<jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>
<mailto:jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>>> wrote:
>
> So, besides maybe a better name there was no other
comments. Can we
> do what's next to vote for an approval?
>
> I like "ODL Support Tools" as a name. what about repo
name? keep it
> odltools, or the longer odlsupporttools?
>
> ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller
odltools for the repo name.
>
>
>
> JamO
>
>
> On 5/22/18 10:47 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>
> On 22/05/18 01:01, Jamo Luhrsen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we would like to propose a new project. The wiki
proposal is here:
>
>
https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools
<https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools>
>
<https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools
<https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools>>
>
> please review and offer any feedback.
>
>
> OpenDaylight (Support|Debug) Tools perhaps, just not
to get into
> everything-belongs-here-because-of-project-name territory?
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> project-proposals mailing list
> project-proposals@...
<mailto:project-proposals@...>
<mailto:project-proposals@...
<mailto:project-proposals@...>>
>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals>
>
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TSC mailing list
> TSC@... <mailto:TSC@...>
<mailto:TSC@...
<mailto:TSC@...>>
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@... <mailto:TSC@...>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>
_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
--
Andrew J Grimberg
Lead, IT Release Engineering
The Linux Foundation
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Agreed. When looking at ODL's Gerrit system it's obvious that this is an ODL project however when looking from PyPi that wouldn't be obvious at all.
We could have supporttools as the repo name, but deploy to PyPi as odltools though but then there's a mismatch in name to repo.
Regards, Thanh
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote: Can we stay with odltools? These tools are installed via pip install odltools so it is better if it has odl in the package name.
Adding support doesnt add much as tools implies the same. On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 10:02 AM Jamo Luhrsen < jluhrsen@...> wrote: I'm good with 'supporttools'
JamO
On 6/6/18 3:03 AM, Michael Vorburger wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@... <mailto:nite@...>> wrote:
>
> Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch?
>
>
> +1 to supporttools, that's more specific than "[odl]tools" which could be anything and everything.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
> *From:* shague@... <mailto:shague@...>
> *Sent:* June 6, 2018 02:30
> *To:* jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>
> *Cc:* nite@... <mailto:nite@...>; project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org
> <mailto:project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org>; tsc@... <mailto:tsc@lists.opendaylight.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>> wrote:
>
> So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we
> do what's next to vote for an approval?
>
> I like "ODL Support Tools" as a name. what about repo name? keep it
> odltools, or the longer odlsupporttools?
>
> ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
>
>
>
> JamO
>
>
> On 5/22/18 10:47 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>
> On 22/05/18 01:01, Jamo Luhrsen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we would like to propose a new project. The wiki proposal is here:
>
> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools
> <https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools>
>
> please review and offer any feedback.
>
>
> OpenDaylight (Support|Debug) Tools perhaps, just not to get into
> everything-belongs-here-because-of-project-name territory?
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> project-proposals mailing list
> project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org <mailto:project-proposals@lists.opendaylight.org>
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TSC mailing list
> TSC@... <mailto:TSC@lists.opendaylight.org>
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>
>
>
_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Can we stay with odltools? These tools are installed via pip install odltools so it is better if it has odl in the package name.
Adding support doesnt add much as tools implies the same.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 10:02 AM Jamo Luhrsen < jluhrsen@...> wrote: I'm good with 'supporttools'
JamO
On 6/6/18 3:03 AM, Michael Vorburger wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@... <mailto:nite@...>> wrote:
>
> Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch?
>
>
> +1 to supporttools, that's more specific than "[odl]tools" which could be anything and everything.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
> *From:* shague@... <mailto:shague@...>
> *Sent:* June 6, 2018 02:30
> *To:* jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>
> *Cc:* nite@... <mailto:nite@...>; project-proposals@...
> <mailto:project-proposals@...>; tsc@... <mailto:tsc@...>
> *Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>> wrote:
>
> So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we
> do what's next to vote for an approval?
>
> I like "ODL Support Tools" as a name. what about repo name? keep it
> odltools, or the longer odlsupporttools?
>
> ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
>
>
>
> JamO
>
>
> On 5/22/18 10:47 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
>
> On 22/05/18 01:01, Jamo Luhrsen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we would like to propose a new project. The wiki proposal is here:
>
> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools
> <https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools>
>
> please review and offer any feedback.
>
>
> OpenDaylight (Support|Debug) Tools perhaps, just not to get into
> everything-belongs-here-because-of-project-name territory?
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> project-proposals mailing list
> project-proposals@... <mailto:project-proposals@...>
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TSC mailing list
> TSC@... <mailto:TSC@...>
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>
>
>
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@...>
I'm good with 'supporttools'
JamO
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 6/6/18 3:03 AM, Michael Vorburger wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Robert Varga <nite@... <mailto:nite@...>> wrote:
Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch? +1 to supporttools, that's more specific than "[odl]tools" which could be anything and everything.
Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
*From:* shague@... <mailto:shague@...>
*Sent:* June 6, 2018 02:30
*To:* jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>
*Cc:* nite@... <mailto:nite@...>; project-proposals@... <mailto:project-proposals@...>; tsc@... <mailto:tsc@...>
*Subject:* Re: [Project-proposals] [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhrsen@... <mailto:jluhrsen@...>> wrote:
So, besides maybe a better name there was no other comments. Can we
do what's next to vote for an approval?
I like "ODL Support Tools" as a name. what about repo name? keep it
odltools, or the longer odlsupporttools?
ODL Support Tools sounds good. I would prefer the smaller odltools for the repo name.
JamO
On 5/22/18 10:47 AM, Robert Varga wrote:
On 22/05/18 01:01, Jamo Luhrsen wrote:
Hi,
we would like to propose a new project. The wiki proposal is here:
https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools
<https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:ODLTools>
please review and offer any feedback.
OpenDaylight (Support|Debug) Tools perhaps, just not to get into
everything-belongs-here-because-of-project-name territory?
Regards,
Robert
_______________________________________________
project-proposals mailing list
project-proposals@... <mailto:project-proposals@...>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/project-proposals>
_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@... <mailto:TSC@...>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc>
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Michael Vorburger <vorburger@...>
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
Since odl is kind of implicit... supporttools or somesuch?
Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Orange Network
Sent: June 6, 2018 02:30 To: jluhrsen@... Cc: nite@...; project-proposals@...; tsc@... Subject: Re: [Project-proposals] [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
|
|
|
Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Project proposal for "ODLTools"
|
|
|
|
|
|
