Re: containers mini-summit?

[Pavel Emelyanov <xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul-3ImXcnM4P+0@public.gmane.org):
>> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>> I just sent the next (final) version of the containers development
>>> roadmap.  Eric Biederman and Paul Menage will be at kernel summit
>>> representing this work.
>>>
>>> We had planned on having a containers mini-summit the day before the
>>> kernel summit.  However interest in that appears as though it may be
>>> too low to justify having a real mini-summit.
>>>
>>> So we have a few options:
>>>
>>> 	1. we could have a mini-summit purely by phone.
>>> 	2. there is a possibility of using a part of a
>>> 	   conference room from LCE, if attendance will
>>> 	   be low.  However, having a phone line to include
>>> 	   those who cannot attend would be unlikely.
>>> 	3. if there is a large planned attendance, we could
>>> 	   continue to seek a separate venue for the
>>> 	   mini-summit.
>>>
>>> Who is interested in (a) attending the mini-summit in person, (b)
>>> attending the mini-summit by phone, or (c) not interested?
>> I will be there in person.
> 
> Still waiting to hear whether anyone other than yourself, Eric, and Paul
> would be there...  If not, I assume you could meet in one of your hotel
> rooms and dial into the phone meeting?  :)

Well, actually, I'd prefer meeting in person even if there will be
only 4 people. Talking tete-a-tete is always better than phone-a-phone :)

Except for to meet in some cafe/park in case not many people come.

>>> For those interested in attending, what would you expect to happen at
>>> the mini-summit?  a) discuss the roadmap to ensure everyone is
>>> properly represented at the summit  b) go over pieces of functionality
>> >from the roadmap and discuss implementation options, who is
>>> interested in working on what, and possible timelines.  c) something
>>> else.
>> I think it would be good if someone makes a short presentation of
>> what is already done and what is being developed now so that we all
>> can have an overall picture in sight.
> 
> Hmm, so in front of the current 'roadmap' you'd like to see a list of
> what's been accomplished so far?

Not exactly. The entire picture. E.g. I have no idea of what is going on
with network namespaces and checkpoint/restart. I'd also like to know what
people think about the kernel memory resource management that was discussed
long ago and some more questions.

> I suppose that might be a good way of showing the community that this is
> all work in progress and going along nicely, not brand-new development.
> Pavel, do you mind writing that up?

I do not :) I do not even mind making a presentation and showing it up in
the mini-summit, but as I have told I haven't got a complete picture of
what's happening. Actually I admitted that everyone has some gaps in
their knowledges about the overall situation and thought that the person,
responsible for this presentation would spend some time collecting the
information from other people :)

> Eric, do you mind at the mini-summit (or mini-summit phone call) going
> over what you were going to present at the kernel summit?
> 
> thanks,
> -serge
>