On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 3:14 AM Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> On 10/06/2015 06:01 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > On 10/06/2015 01:14 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:40 PM Roman Prykhodchenko <m...@romcheg.me > >> <mailto:m...@romcheg.me>> wrote: > >> > >> Atm I have the following pros. and cons. regarding testrepository: > >> > >> pros.: > >> > >> 1. It’s ”standard" in OpenStack so using it gives Fuel more karma > >> and moves it more under big tent > >> > >> > >> I don't think that big tent model aims at eliminating diversity of tools > >> we use in our projects. A collection of web frameworks used in big tent > >> is an example of that. > > > > From the downstream distro point of view, I don't agree in general, and > > with the web framework in particular. (though it's less a concern for > > the testr vs pbr). We keep adding dependencies and duplicates, but never > > remove them. For example, tablib and suds/sudsjurko need to be removed > > because they are not maintainable, there's not much work to do so, but > > nobody does the work... > > The Big Tent has absolutely no change in opinion about eliminating > diversity of tools. OpenStack has ALWAYS striven to reduce diversity of > tools. Big Tent applies OpenStack to more things that request to be part > of OpenStack. > > Nothing has changed in the intent. > > Diversity of tools in a project this size is a bad idea. Always has > been. Always will be. > > The amount of web frameworks in use is a bug. > I'm sorry, that was my mistake. I just can't remember any project that was declined place under big tent (or integrated) because of a library in use.
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev