All- Now that neutron northbound exists, we need to make two decisions fairly quickly: 1) who is the project lead. I'll save Ed the trouble of nominating me and say that I'm happy to take the role.

+1 to Ryan for project lead, he's got the greatest depth in the code. I think we are properly offset 1 personally... but very open to other thoughts there. Ed

same here. +1 to Ryan. I’d think it is part of lithuim already, no? it is just a matter of whether lithuim will have it in the controller repo or in the newly created repo? — flavio

Flavio, I think technically we have the right as a project that split before M3 to join Lithium, and as a practical matter I can't imagine we won't. I think the bigger question is, at which offset,

Ok, so project lead is decided (that was a surprise) As to Lithium, once we split, we aren't actually officially part until we say we are - so we need to say we want in and on what

i’d think the sooner the better so: 1) the project lead can push code 2) it will be a lot faster to verify the changes — gute

Hi Ryan, I just noticed that in some files you changed yesterday [1], the error code 503 is not mentioned in the @StatusCodes({ ... @ResponseCode(code = 503, condition =

Those annotations are for documentation generation... So, yes we should get them rationalized, but it's not quite as critical as getting the basic coverage in. Ryan Flavio Fernandes <ffernand@...>

There is a commit to address this now [1], which brings up the question of +2/+1 behavior: I'd like to propose that we have two committers look at each patch - the first +1s it and the second +2s

I'm not hugely comfortable requiring two committers to review a patch as a matter of policy, because some things (like the .gitignore) are pretty harmless and unalloyed goods and some thing are

it does to me, Ed. I think using common sense on determining whether the complexity requires more than 1 pair of eyes is good. you will def never have me +2 and submit something, unless I’m very

I'm ok with exceptions on things like .gitignore or .gitreview, but I'd like to have an agreement in the archives on having more eyes on bigger items, just to set the expectations for

Hello, First congratulations to Neutron project joining Lithium SR, from release management’s point of view, I would like to collect the following data from neutron project. 1) Please

Hi all, I have done odl and Openstack integration when I run ODL ,Instances are not able to connect external network. But if I stop ODl I am ableto connect external network. Can anyone help me out

Hi all, I am working on ODL and Openstack integration and am successfullyable to integrate, But I have a problem that br-ex is not passing packet tobr-int as vice-versa so I am not able to connect

Mandeep- Assuming that you are using OVSDB to manage the OVS switches, you should bring this question up on the ovsdb-dev mailing list. The neutron northbound service does not handle low level

Mandeep, Unless you explicitly enable OVSDB to perform L3 forwarding, you will need an L3 agent in openstack to forward packets through br-ex. By default, OVSDB will give you L2 functionality

Hi Lori, Thanks for reminder. I am actually waiting for neutron project to send out M1 status email to declare their intention to participate Lithium SR as offset x project. Right now, I don't know

Hi George, Sorry for that. I believe Neutron project is offset 1 and Ryan is the project lead. Because of timing of creation, I'm uncertain if offset 1 is doable for Lithium. As for contact,

Hi Flavio Thanks for the update, I update Lithium release plan page and added neutron as offset 1 project. I need link of neutron's release plan and someone to fill out the dependency diagram,