OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Pavel Emelyanov]

Hi, guys.

We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
development status.

I think it worth making this one.

Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.

Thanks,
Pavel

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Balbir Singh]

* Pavel Emelyanov <xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> [2008-01-16 11:35:11]:

> Hi, guys.
> 
> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
> development status.
> 
> I think it worth making this one.
> 
> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.
> 
> Thanks,
> Pavel

Hi, Pavel,

Sounds like a good idea to me.

-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Cedric Le Goater]

Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Hi, guys.
> 
> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
> development status.
> 
> I think it worth making this one.

OK. Let's work on an abstract.

> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.

Yes !

C.

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Pavel Emelyanov]

Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Hi, guys.
>>
>> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
>> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
>> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
>> development status.
>>
>> I think it worth making this one.
> 
> OK. Let's work on an abstract.

Fine :) Actually the main question is - who will be 
responsible for this talk. If nobody objects I can 
take care of it ;)

>> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.
> 
> Yes !

:)

> C.
> 

Thanks,
Pavel

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Denis V. Lunev]

By the way, may be it is better to request a BOF rather than mini-summit
to have a presentation of our work for a "outside" world...

Regards,
	Den

Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Cedric Le Goater wrote:
>> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>> Hi, guys.
>>>
>>> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
>>> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
>>> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
>>> development status.
>>>
>>> I think it worth making this one.
>> OK. Let's work on an abstract.
> 
> Fine :) Actually the main question is - who will be 
> responsible for this talk. If nobody objects I can 
> take care of it ;)
> 
>>> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.
>> Yes !
> 
> :)
> 
>> C.
>>
> 
> Thanks,
> Pavel
> 

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Denis V. Lunev (den-3ImXcnM4P+0@public.gmane.org):
> By the way, may be it is better to request a BOF rather than mini-summit
> to have a presentation of our work for a "outside" world...

Or both.  All three.  BOF for sort of a containers install-fest/tutorial,
paper for a more formal how it's implemented, and finally a mini-summit
for future planning.

> Regards,
> 	Den
> 
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> >> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> >>> Hi, guys.
> >>>
> >>> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
> >>> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
> >>> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
> >>> development status.
> >>>
> >>> I think it worth making this one.
> >> OK. Let's work on an abstract.
> > 
> > Fine :) Actually the main question is - who will be 
> > responsible for this talk. If nobody objects I can 
> > take care of it ;)
> > 
> >>> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.
> >> Yes !
> > 
> > :)
> > 
> >> C.
> >>
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Pavel
> > 

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Kir Kolyshkin]

Guess we can have both. BOF format is a bit different (not too much 
time, more people), so better to have mini-summit first.

BTW does anybody knows whether the Kernel Summit will be "attached" to 
OLS this year?

Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> By the way, may be it is better to request a BOF rather than mini-summit
> to have a presentation of our work for a "outside" world...
>
> Regards,
> 	Den
>
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>   
>> Cedric Le Goater wrote:
>>     
>>> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hi, guys.
>>>>
>>>> We're coming up to the deadline of proposals submissions for
>>>> OLS2008 and I noticed, that we didn't decide whether we're
>>>> going to make some summary report about the namespaces/cgroups
>>>> development status.
>>>>
>>>> I think it worth making this one.
>>>>         
>>> OK. Let's work on an abstract.
>>>       
>> Fine :) Actually the main question is - who will be 
>> responsible for this talk. If nobody objects I can 
>> take care of it ;)
>>
>>     
>>>> Besides, we can send a request for a mini-summit.
>>>>         
>>> Yes !
>>>       
>> :)
>>
>>     
>>> C.
>>>
>>>       
>> Thanks,
>> Pavel
>>
>>     
>
>   

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Cedric Le Goater]

Kir Kolyshkin wrote:
> Guess we can have both. BOF format is a bit different (not too much
> time, more people), so better to have mini-summit first.

Yes. I agree. 

C.

Re: OLS2008 "namespaces status update" report

[Balbir Singh]

* Kir Kolyshkin <kir-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> [2008-01-16 19:08:55]:

> Guess we can have both. BOF format is a bit different (not too much time, 
> more people), so better to have mini-summit first.
>

Yes, and OLS has explicitly asked for proposals to mini-summits

> BTW does anybody knows whether the Kernel Summit will be "attached" to OLS 
> this year?
>

I thought it was going to be held in Portland this year.

-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL