On Jan 6, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Stackers, > > I was hoping to get some answers on a few questions I had regarding the > Gantt project [1]. Specifically, here are my queries: > > 1) Why was Nova forked to the http://github.com/openstack/gantt > repository? Forking Nova just to then remove a bunch of code that > doesn't relate to the scheduler code means that we bring 10K+ commits > and a git history along with the new project... this seems to be the > wrong origin for a project the aims to be a separate service. There's a > reason that Cinder and Neutron didn't start out as a fork of Nova, after > all…
Authorship history is nice, but this does seem a bit excessive. The cinder strategy of a single squashed fork would have been/still be fine I’m sure. > > 2) Why is Gantt in the /openstack GitHub organization? Wouldn't > the /stackforge organization be more appropriate for a project that > isn't integrated? If I understand some of the backstory behind Gantt, > the idea was to create a scheduler service from the existing Nova > scheduler code in order to "complete the work sometime in our lifetime". > While I understand the drive to start with something that already exists > and iterate over it, I don't understand why the project went right into > the /openstack organization instead of following the /stackforge > processes for housing code that bakes and gets iterated on before > proposing for incubation. Some explanation would be great here. This is split-out of existing code so it is following the same path as cinder. The goal is to deprecate the existing nova scheduler in I. It currently a new project under the nova program I believe. > > 3) Where is feature planning happening for Gantt? The Launchpad site for > Gantt [2] is empty. Furthermore, there are a number of blueprints for > improving the Nova scheduler, notably the no-db-scheduler blueprint [3], > which even has code submitted for it and is targeted to Icehouse-2. How > are improvements like this planned to be ported (if at all) to Gantt? Not sure about the launchpad site. There is a regular scheduler group meeting and as I understand it the hope will be to do the no-db-scheduler blueprint. There was quite a bit of debate on whether to do the no-db-scheduler stuff before or after the forklift and I think the consensus was to do the forklift first. > > 4) Is the aim of Gantt to provide a RESTful HTTP API in addition to the > RPC-based API that the existing Nova scheduler exposes? In the short term the plan is to just replicate the rpc api, but I think a REST api will be considered long term. Vish > > Thanks much in advance for answers, and apologies if these have been > answered before and I missed the ML threads or design summit > discussions. > > Best, > -jay > > [1] https://github.com/openstack/gantt/ > [2] http://blueprints.launchpad.net/gantt > [3] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/no-db-scheduler > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
