Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx): > "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Right, the whole point of Daniel including a 'reading list' was just so > > that we can avoid wasting time discussing existing implementations. So > > he wasn't suggesting that we would be discussing those in detail, in > > fact quite the opposite. > > Right however he was suggesting we discuss how to implement it without > agreeing on basic principles. Maybe I'm wrong and all of the different > development groups have a common idea of what needs to be done but > I would be surprised if that were the case. IMO recent threads have clearly proven that you're right about basic principles. Question is what is the right level to start at first, and how do we go about reaching concensus? I.e. is the first question whether we should do a fully in-kernel checkpoint and restart vs entirely userspace vs a mix, or is there another place we should start? It sounds like you have some good ideas in any case on where to start so I'm glad you'll be there :) thanks, -serge > >> With any luck the mini-summit before OLS will be the start of a > >> conversation that will go on all week, and continue on the mailing > >> lists. > > > > Agreed. > > > > This could be tough to pull off, but if we can walk out of there with a > > short focused list of coding todos with the intent of pumping out > > patches by the end of OLS, turning OLS into a bit of a hack-fest, that > > would imo be great. > > I totally agree. > > > (But then that's precisely what I like to do at conferences - sit by > > some wall and pick something completely new to code, while once in > > awhile getting up to chat or see a talk. Does that make me > > anti-social?) > > It means you like to code! > > Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
