On 08/04/2016 11:57 AM, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Ok. I'll play devils advocate here and speak to the other side of this, because
you raised an interesting issue...
Ceph is outside of the tent. It provides a (mostly) api compatible
implementation of the swift api (radosgw), and it is commonly used in OpenStack
deployments.
Other OpenStack projects don't take it into account because its not a big tent
thing, even though it is very common. Because of some rules about only testing
OpenStack things, radosgw is not tested against even though it is so common.
I call BS on this assertion. We test things that outside the tent in the
upstream gate all the time -- the only requirement is that they be
released. We won't test against unreleased stuff that's outside the big
tent and the reason for that should be obvious.
This causes odd breakages at times that could easily be prevented, but for
procedural things around the Big Tent.
The only way I can see for "odd breakages" to sneak in is on the Ceph
side, if they aren't testing their changes against OpenStack and they
introduce a regression, then that's their fault (assuming of course that
we have good test coverage running against the latest stable release of
Ceph). It's reasonable to request that we increase our test coverage
with Ceph if it's not good enough and if we are the ones causing the
breakages. But their outside status isn't the problem.
-Ben Swartzlander
I do think this should be fixed before we advocate single vendor projects exit
the big tent after some time. As the testing situation may be made worse.
Thanks,
Kevin
________________________________________
From: Thierry Carrez [thie...@openstack.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:59 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] persistently single-vendor projects
Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 08/01/2016 09:39 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
But if a project is persistently single-vendor after some time and
nobody seems interested to join it, the technical value of that project
being "in" OpenStack rather than a separate project in the OpenStack
ecosystem of projects is limited. It's limited for OpenStack (why
provide resources to support a project that is obviously only beneficial
to one organization ?), and it's limited to the organization itself (why
go through the OpenStack-specific open processes when you could shortcut
it with internal tools and meetings ? why accept the oversight of the
Technical Committee ?).
A project can still be useful for everyone with a single vendor
contributing to it, even after a long period of existence. IMO that's
not the issue we're trying to solve.
I agree with that -- open source projects can be useful for everyone
even if only a single vendor contributes to it.
But you seem to imply that the only way an open source project can be
useful is if it's developed as an OpenStack project under the OpenStack
Technical Committee governance. I'm not advocating that these projects
should stop or disappear. I'm just saying that if they are very unlikely
to grow a more diverse affiliation in the future, they derive little
value in being developed under the OpenStack Technical Committee
oversight, and would probably be equally useful if developed outside of
OpenStack official projects governance. There are plenty of projects
that are useful to OpenStack that are not developed under the TC
governance (libvirt, Ceph, OpenvSwitch...)
What is the point for a project to submit themselves to the oversight of
a multi-organization Technical Committee if they always will be the
result of the efforts of a single organization ?
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
