[openflowplugin-dev] OpenFlow Plugin and OpenFlow Java Library


Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...>
 

Abhijit,
        This strikes me as good news overall.  It might be a good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers, particularly as they will need to vote to archive the openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.  As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the case).   All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform the TSC :)
        Thank you for guiding this process :)

Ed

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into the process.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin (connection handling,
> state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow Java Library (library
> for the low level wire protocol implementation). This increases the
> logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound development (done in two
> places) and project reporting overhead. The other southbounds like OVSDB,
> NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects - even if some of them may
> have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>
> Also more importantly currently most community activity
> (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in the OpenFlow Plugin
> community even though the implementation needs to be done in OF Plugin and
> OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a single active committer
> (Jozef Bacigal).
>
> So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to unify these two
> projects.
>
> The current thought:
>   Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the OpenFlow Plugin.
>
> Advantages:
> 1) This may not need a lot of work.
> 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also committers on OpenFlow
> Plugin.
> 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not add any new committers
> - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will work with the TSC when
> we have decided the exact action).
>
> Challenges / open questions:
> 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code for code done before
> the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas on this - Thanh, Anil
> B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project into another project or
> merge the repos?

We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then merged netvirt
and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files into NetVirt
and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with the commands
to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those emails right
now.

You should also stop the jobs running for the old openflowjava repo
and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.

>    One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow Java Library repo
> still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not participate in future
> simultaneous releases.
> 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects? Just move the OpenFlow
> Java documentation inside the developer guide under OFP documentation?

Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant docs to netvirt.

> 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of OpenFlow Java Library? If we
> keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without participating in
> simultaneous release - we likely do not have to address this problem.
>
> If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Abhijit
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openflowjava-dev mailing list
> openflowjava-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
>

_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
openflowplugin-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev



Abhijit Kumbhare
 

Agree with you Ed about having a vote in OpenFlow Java committer community - and in general the TSC role if we plan to archive. Had planned on that based on how we have decided to proceed (based on Tomas's study of impact). Unfortunately I have been offline for periods of time during the last week or two (on a vacation). Tomorrow (Wednesday) I will be meeting Jozef Bacigal (OpenFlow Java & Plugin committer) and Tomas Slusny (OpenFlow Plugin committer working on this) to understand the latest status on how this has evolved and based on that will figure out the best course of action (after discussing with the other OFP/OFJ committers).

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...> wrote:
Abhijit,
        This strikes me as good news overall.  It might be a good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers, particularly as they will need to vote to archive the openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.  As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the case).   All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform the TSC :)
        Thank you for guiding this process :)

Ed

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into the process.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin (connection handling,
> state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow Java Library (library
> for the low level wire protocol implementation). This increases the
> logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound development (done in two
> places) and project reporting overhead. The other southbounds like OVSDB,
> NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects - even if some of them may
> have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>
> Also more importantly currently most community activity
> (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in the OpenFlow Plugin
> community even though the implementation needs to be done in OF Plugin and
> OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a single active committer
> (Jozef Bacigal).
>
> So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to unify these two
> projects.
>
> The current thought:
>   Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the OpenFlow Plugin.
>
> Advantages:
> 1) This may not need a lot of work.
> 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also committers on OpenFlow
> Plugin.
> 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not add any new committers
> - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will work with the TSC when
> we have decided the exact action).
>
> Challenges / open questions:
> 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code for code done before
> the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas on this - Thanh, Anil
> B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project into another project or
> merge the repos?

We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then merged netvirt
and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files into NetVirt
and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with the commands
to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those emails right
now.

You should also stop the jobs running for the old openflowjava repo
and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.

>    One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow Java Library repo
> still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not participate in future
> simultaneous releases.
> 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects? Just move the OpenFlow
> Java documentation inside the developer guide under OFP documentation?

Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant docs to netvirt.

> 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of OpenFlow Java Library? If we
> keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without participating in
> simultaneous release - we likely do not have to address this problem.
>
> If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Abhijit
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openflowjava-dev mailing list
> openflowjava-dev@...light.org
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
>

_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
openflowplugin-dev@...aylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev




Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...>
 

Perfect :)

Ed

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Agree with you Ed about having a vote in OpenFlow Java committer community - and in general the TSC role if we plan to archive. Had planned on that based on how we have decided to proceed (based on Tomas's study of impact). Unfortunately I have been offline for periods of time during the last week or two (on a vacation). Tomorrow (Wednesday) I will be meeting Jozef Bacigal (OpenFlow Java & Plugin committer) and Tomas Slusny (OpenFlow Plugin committer working on this) to understand the latest status on how this has evolved and based on that will figure out the best course of action (after discussing with the other OFP/OFJ committers).

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...> wrote:
Abhijit,
        This strikes me as good news overall.  It might be a good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers, particularly as they will need to vote to archive the openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.  As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the case).   All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform the TSC :)
        Thank you for guiding this process :)

Ed

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into the process.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin (connection handling,
> state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow Java Library (library
> for the low level wire protocol implementation). This increases the
> logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound development (done in two
> places) and project reporting overhead. The other southbounds like OVSDB,
> NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects - even if some of them may
> have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>
> Also more importantly currently most community activity
> (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in the OpenFlow Plugin
> community even though the implementation needs to be done in OF Plugin and
> OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a single active committer
> (Jozef Bacigal).
>
> So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to unify these two
> projects.
>
> The current thought:
>   Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the OpenFlow Plugin.
>
> Advantages:
> 1) This may not need a lot of work.
> 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also committers on OpenFlow
> Plugin.
> 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not add any new committers
> - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will work with the TSC when
> we have decided the exact action).
>
> Challenges / open questions:
> 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code for code done before
> the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas on this - Thanh, Anil
> B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project into another project or
> merge the repos?

We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then merged netvirt
and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files into NetVirt
and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with the commands
to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those emails right
now.

You should also stop the jobs running for the old openflowjava repo
and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.

>    One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow Java Library repo
> still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not participate in future
> simultaneous releases.
> 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects? Just move the OpenFlow
> Java documentation inside the developer guide under OFP documentation?

Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant docs to netvirt.

> 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of OpenFlow Java Library? If we
> keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without participating in
> simultaneous release - we likely do not have to address this problem.
>
> If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Abhijit
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openflowjava-dev mailing list
> openflowjava-dev@...light.org
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
>

_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
openflowplugin-dev@...aylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev





Abhijit Kumbhare
 

I talked with Jozef and Tomas right now - and we think it will be good to discuss this in the Monday OpenFlow Plugin meeting this process (steps provided by Andy, the process followed by Sam/NetVirt when they consumed VPN Service into NetVirt, history, etc.). That way we can ensure it is done right - have all the OpenFlow Plugin committers vote during the meeting if needed. And then initiate OpenFlow Java vote. Hence we will greatly appreciate if Andy (Grimberg) and Sam Hague can join the meeting. The meeting details are here:


Also pasting below:

Weekly on Mondays from 08:30-9:30 am PST/PDT | 11:30-12:30 EST/EDT | 15:30-16:30 UTC during Daylight Time/16:30-17:30 UTC during Standard Time



On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Agree with you Ed about having a vote in OpenFlow Java committer community - and in general the TSC role if we plan to archive. Had planned on that based on how we have decided to proceed (based on Tomas's study of impact). Unfortunately I have been offline for periods of time during the last week or two (on a vacation). Tomorrow (Wednesday) I will be meeting Jozef Bacigal (OpenFlow Java & Plugin committer) and Tomas Slusny (OpenFlow Plugin committer working on this) to understand the latest status on how this has evolved and based on that will figure out the best course of action (after discussing with the other OFP/OFJ committers).

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...> wrote:
Abhijit,
        This strikes me as good news overall.  It might be a good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers, particularly as they will need to vote to archive the openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.  As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the case).   All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform the TSC :)
        Thank you for guiding this process :)

Ed

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into the process.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@...> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <abhijitkoss@...> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin (connection handling,
> state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow Java Library (library
> for the low level wire protocol implementation). This increases the
> logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound development (done in two
> places) and project reporting overhead. The other southbounds like OVSDB,
> NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects - even if some of them may
> have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>
> Also more importantly currently most community activity
> (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in the OpenFlow Plugin
> community even though the implementation needs to be done in OF Plugin and
> OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a single active committer
> (Jozef Bacigal).
>
> So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to unify these two
> projects.
>
> The current thought:
>   Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the OpenFlow Plugin.
>
> Advantages:
> 1) This may not need a lot of work.
> 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also committers on OpenFlow
> Plugin.
> 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not add any new committers
> - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will work with the TSC when
> we have decided the exact action).
>
> Challenges / open questions:
> 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code for code done before
> the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas on this - Thanh, Anil
> B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project into another project or
> merge the repos?

We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then merged netvirt
and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files into NetVirt
and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with the commands
to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those emails right
now.

You should also stop the jobs running for the old openflowjava repo
and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.

>    One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow Java Library repo
> still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not participate in future
> simultaneous releases.
> 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects? Just move the OpenFlow
> Java documentation inside the developer guide under OFP documentation?

Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant docs to netvirt.

> 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of OpenFlow Java Library? If we
> keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without participating in
> simultaneous release - we likely do not have to address this problem.
>
> If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Abhijit
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openflowjava-dev mailing list
> openflowjava-dev@...light.org
> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
>

_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
openflowplugin-dev@...aylight.org
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev





Andrew Grimberg <agrimberg@...>
 

Abhijit,

Yes I can join this coming week.

-Andy-

On 06/28/2017 09:14 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare wrote:
I talked with Jozef and Tomas right now - and we think it will be good
to discuss this in the Monday OpenFlow Plugin meeting this process
(steps provided by Andy, the process followed by Sam/NetVirt when they
consumed VPN Service into NetVirt, history, etc.). That way we can
ensure it is done right - have all the OpenFlow Plugin committers vote
during the meeting if needed. And then initiate OpenFlow Java vote.
Hence we will greatly appreciate if Andy (Grimberg) and Sam Hague can
join the meeting. The meeting details are here:

https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Weekly_Project_Meeting_List

Also pasting below:

Weekly on Mondays from 08:30-9:30 am PST/PDT | 11:30-12:30 EST/EDT |
15:30-16:30 UTC during Daylight Time/16:30-17:30 UTC during Standard Time

* Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/751766361
* Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +14086380968,751766361# or
+16465588656,751766361#
* Or Telephone:
o Dial: +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll) or +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll)
o Meeting ID: 751 766 361
o International numbers
available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RnpzDoDRkdpjWl6TcLb7wYiYV2NYaEUw
* IRC: Freenode: #opendaylight-openflowplugin




On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare
<abhijitkoss@gmail.com <mailto:abhijitkoss@gmail.com>> wrote:

Agree with you Ed about having a vote in OpenFlow Java committer
community - and in general the TSC role if we plan to archive. Had
planned on that based on how we have decided to proceed (based on
Tomas's study of impact). Unfortunately I have been offline for
periods of time during the last week or two (on a vacation).
Tomorrow (Wednesday) I will be meeting Jozef Bacigal (OpenFlow Java
& Plugin committer) and Tomas Slusny (OpenFlow Plugin committer
working on this) to understand the latest status on how this has
evolved and based on that will figure out the best course of action
(after discussing with the other OFP/OFJ committers).

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com
<mailto:hagbard@gmail.com>> wrote:

Abhijit,
This strikes me as good news overall. It might be a
good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers,
particularly as they will need to vote to archive the
openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.
As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava
project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with
the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the
case). All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform
the TSC :)
Thank you for guiding this process :)

Ed

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare
<abhijitkoss@gmail.com <mailto:abhijitkoss@gmail.com>> wrote:

Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into
the process.

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@redhat.com
<mailto:shague@redhat.com>> wrote:

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare
<abhijitkoss@gmail.com <mailto:abhijitkoss@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin
(connection handling,
> state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow
Java Library (library
> for the low level wire protocol implementation). This
increases the
> logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound
development (done in two
> places) and project reporting overhead. The other
southbounds like OVSDB,
> NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects -
even if some of them may
> have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>
> Also more importantly currently most community activity
> (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in
the OpenFlow Plugin
> community even though the implementation needs to be
done in OF Plugin and
> OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a
single active committer
> (Jozef Bacigal).
>
> So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to
unify these two
> projects.
>
> The current thought:
> Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the
OpenFlow Plugin.
>
> Advantages:
> 1) This may not need a lot of work.
> 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also
committers on OpenFlow
> Plugin.
> 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not
add any new committers
> - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will
work with the TSC when
> we have decided the exact action).
>
> Challenges / open questions:
> 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code
for code done before
> the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas
on this - Thanh, Anil
> B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project
into another project or
> merge the repos?

We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then
merged netvirt
and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files
into NetVirt
and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with
the commands
to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those
emails right
now.

You should also stop the jobs running for the old
openflowjava repo
and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.

> One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow
Java Library repo
> still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not
participate in future
> simultaneous releases.
> 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects?
Just move the OpenFlow
> Java documentation inside the developer guide under
OFP documentation?

Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant
docs to netvirt.

> 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of
OpenFlow Java Library? If we
> keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without
participating in
> simultaneous release - we likely do not have to
address this problem.
>
> If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please
reply to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Abhijit
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openflowjava-dev mailing list
> openflowjava-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
<mailto:openflowjava-dev@lists.opendaylight.org>
>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev>
>


_______________________________________________
openflowplugin-dev mailing list
openflowplugin-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
<mailto:openflowplugin-dev@lists.opendaylight.org>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
<https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev>



--
Andrew J Grimberg
Lead, IT Release Engineering
The Linux Foundation


Abhijit Kumbhare
 

Thanks Andy! Hopefully Sam can also make it.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Andrew Grimberg <agrimberg@...> wrote:
Abhijit,

Yes I can join this coming week.

-Andy-

On 06/28/2017 09:14 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare wrote:
> I talked with Jozef and Tomas right now - and we think it will be good
> to discuss this in the Monday OpenFlow Plugin meeting this process
> (steps provided by Andy, the process followed by Sam/NetVirt when they
> consumed VPN Service into NetVirt, history, etc.). That way we can
> ensure it is done right - have all the OpenFlow Plugin committers vote
> during the meeting if needed. And then initiate OpenFlow Java vote.
> Hence we will greatly appreciate if Andy (Grimberg) and Sam Hague can
> join the meeting. The meeting details are here:
>
> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Weekly_Project_Meeting_List
>
> Also pasting below:
>
> Weekly on Mondays from 08:30-9:30 am PST/PDT | 11:30-12:30 EST/EDT |
> 15:30-16:30 UTC during Daylight Time/16:30-17:30 UTC during Standard Time
>
>   * Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/751766361
>   * Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +14086380968,751766361# or
>     +16465588656,751766361#
>   * Or Telephone:
>       o Dial: +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll) or +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll)
>       o Meeting ID: 751 766 361
>       o International numbers
>         available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RnpzDoDRkdpjWl6TcLb7wYiYV2NYaEUw
>   * IRC: Freenode: #opendaylight-openflowplugin
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare
> <abhijitkoss@... <mailto:abhijitkoss@...>> wrote:
>
>     Agree with you Ed about having a vote in OpenFlow Java committer
>     community - and in general the TSC role if we plan to archive. Had
>     planned on that based on how we have decided to proceed (based on
>     Tomas's study of impact). Unfortunately I have been offline for
>     periods of time during the last week or two (on a vacation).
>     Tomorrow (Wednesday) I will be meeting Jozef Bacigal (OpenFlow Java
>     & Plugin committer) and Tomas Slusny (OpenFlow Plugin committer
>     working on this) to understand the latest status on how this has
>     evolved and based on that will figure out the best course of action
>     (after discussing with the other OFP/OFJ committers).
>
>     On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...
>     <mailto:hagbard@...>> wrote:
>
>         Abhijit,
>                 This strikes me as good news overall.  It might be a
>         good idea to get a vote from the OpenflowJava Committers,
>         particularly as they will need to vote to archive the
>         openflowjava project, and it also makes everything very clear.
>         As to the TSCs role, it has one for archiving the openflowjava
>         project, and it would have one if there was some dispute with
>         the openflowjava committers (which does not appear to be the
>         case).   All of that said, it is probably courteous to inform
>         the TSC :)
>                 Thank you for guiding this process :)
>
>         Ed
>
>         On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare
>         <abhijitkoss@... <mailto:abhijitkoss@...>> wrote:
>
>             Thanks Sam! We may have some questions as we go further into
>             the process.
>
>             On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:00 PM Sam Hague <shague@...
>             <mailto:shague@...>> wrote:
>
>                 On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare
>                 <abhijitkoss@... <mailto:abhijitkoss@...>>
>                 wrote:
>                 > Hi folks,
>                 >
>                 > We have 2 projects for OpenFlow - OpenFlow Plugin
>                 (connection handling,
>                 > state management, apps like the FRM, etc.) & OpenFlow
>                 Java Library (library
>                 > for the low level wire protocol implementation). This
>                 increases the
>                 > logistics related to the OpenFlow southbound
>                 development (done in two
>                 > places) and project reporting overhead. The other
>                 southbounds like OVSDB,
>                 > NetConf, etc. do not have two different projects -
>                 even if some of them may
>                 > have a similar split internally (plugin & library).
>                 >
>                 > Also more importantly currently most community activity
>                 > (meetings/discussions for the new features) happen in
>                 the OpenFlow Plugin
>                 > community even though the implementation needs to be
>                 done in OF Plugin and
>                 > OFJ Library. Also going forward OFJ may have only a
>                 single active committer
>                 > (Jozef Bacigal).
>                 >
>                 > So some of us feel Nitrogen might be a good time to
>                 unify these two
>                 > projects.
>                 >
>                 > The current thought:
>                 >   Move all the code from OpenFlow Java Library to the
>                 OpenFlow Plugin.
>                 >
>                 > Advantages:
>                 > 1) This may not need a lot of work.
>                 > 2) All active OpenFlow Java committers are also
>                 committers on OpenFlow
>                 > Plugin.
>                 > 3) Since we are not creating a project & if we do not
>                 add any new committers
>                 > - this may not even need a TSC approval (but we will
>                 work with the TSC when
>                 > we have decided the exact action).
>                 >
>                 > Challenges / open questions:
>                 > 1) How do we retain history for the OpenFlow Java code
>                 for code done before
>                 > the code movement? The IT experts may have some ideas
>                 on this - Thanh, Anil
>                 > B, Andrew? Also is there a way to subsume a project
>                 into another project or
>                 > merge the repos?
>
>                 We kept history when we split ovsdb/netvirt and then
>                 merged netvirt
>                 and vpnservice. The flow Andy used copied all the files
>                 into NetVirt
>                 and the history was kept intact. I think I came up with
>                 the commands
>                 to use and Andy did the work - but I can't find those
>                 emails right
>                 now.
>
>                 You should also stop the jobs running for the old
>                 openflowjava repo
>                 and migrate them to use openflowplugin repo.
>
>                 >    One obvious solution, we can just keep the OpenFlow
>                 Java Library repo
>                 > still active - even if OpenFlow Java Library does not
>                 participate in future
>                 > simultaneous releases.
>                 > 2) How do handle the documentation of the 2 projects?
>                 Just move the OpenFlow
>                 > Java documentation inside the developer guide under
>                 OFP documentation?
>
>                 Yes, this is what we did - just pulled in the relvant
>                 docs to netvirt.
>
>                 > 3) How do we handle the inactive committers of
>                 OpenFlow Java Library? If we
>                 > keep OpenFlow Java Library project active without
>                 participating in
>                 > simultaneous release - we likely do not have to
>                 address this problem.
>                 >
>                 > If you have thoughts/suggestions/objections - please
>                 reply to this email.
>                 >
>                 > Thanks,
>                 > Abhijit
>                 >
>                 >
>                 > _______________________________________________
>                 > openflowjava-dev mailing list
>                 > openflowjava-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
>                 <mailto:openflowjava-dev@lists.opendaylight.org>
>                 >
>                 https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev
>                 <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowjava-dev>
>                 >
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             openflowplugin-dev mailing list
>             openflowplugin-dev@lists.opendaylight.org
>             <mailto:openflowplugin-dev@lists.opendaylight.org>
>             https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
>             <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev>
>
>
>
>

--
Andrew J Grimberg
Lead, IT Release Engineering
The Linux Foundation