containers mini-summit?

Serge E. Hallyn serue at
Tue Aug 14 07:08:58 PDT 2007

Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul at
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>> Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul at
>>> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>>> Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul at
>>>>> 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
>> That's what I meant - if there are <6 people, meet in person in
>> someone's hotel room, and then you've got a phone right there so
>> everyone else can dial in.
>>> 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.
>> We could certainly come up with a set of 'status updates' if people
>> would like that.  I.e.
>> 	pidns updates - Pavel/suka
>> 	netns updates - Eric/Daniel/Benjamin
>> 	task containers - Paul
>> 	memory container - Balbir
>> 	memory checkpoint - Dave
> Thanks. I will prepare some presentation. BTW, maybe we can organize

Great, thanks.

> some kind of containers BoF on the conference itself to make other
> people come and listen. Maybe this will attract more developers to the
> virtualization? In this case the presentation may be more descriptive.

By 'the conference itself' do you mean LCE?  That might be worth a shot.


More information about the Containers mailing list