| *** mhen_ is now known as mhen | 03:03 | |
| opendevreview | Adam McArthur proposed openstack/oslo.messaging master: Added Docs for Simulator https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/940495 | 05:59 |
|---|---|---|
| kevko | hberaud[m]: Hi, Herve is there an option to keep oslo.vmware (and of course other openstack projects support this library) - even if we will decide to maitain it ? I know that it's not maintained or added features, bugfixes for years ... But actually we are using it for our customer. Or what will be the process, I start to be afraid that when that | 12:25 |
| kevko | day will come I will need to merge again everything what was removed and track everything in downstream gits .... | 12:25 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: is it possible to just remove tests for oslo.vmware, remove reuqirements etc etc for that library in other projects ? Simply said - mark somehow as experimental and let it live ? | 12:26 |
| kevko | ^^ What about others opinion ? | 12:26 |
| hberaud[m] | @kevko oslo.vmware will remain officially maintained as long as services continue to use it (e.g nova). If tomorrow services not use oslo.vmware anymore, then we will surely decide to retire it. In your case, if you still found some interest in oslo.vmware even if no openstack services us it, then, perhaps, we could engage us in maintenance transition phase, where oslo.vmware is moved to opendev.org/x or abandon its upstream | 12:35 |
| hberaud[m] | maintenance to volunteers. | 12:35 |
| hberaud[m] | I'm not fan of removing tests while we declare that we maintain officially something | 12:36 |
| hberaud[m] | This way you won't have to track everything in your downstream gits and this way won't have to maintain it anymore | 12:37 |
| hberaud[m] | s/and this way WE won't have to maintain it anymore/ | 12:38 |
| hberaud[m] | kevko: feel free to join us at our next meeting next Tuesday at 3pm UTC on #openstack-eventlet-removal . This morning I added the oslo.vmware topic into our meeting agenda | 12:40 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: Thank you Herve | 12:47 |
| hberaud[m] | kevko: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/epoxy-eventlet-tracking | 12:47 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: well, I don't think move oslo.wmare to opendev.org/x/oslo.vmware will help us.. Because actually we are using nova -> vmware | 12:48 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: so this is bigger problem :/ | 12:48 |
| hberaud[m] | yes, that's what I said, we won't move oslo.vmware while nova use it | 12:48 |
| kevko | so it's a bigger problem around whole vmare support | 12:49 |
| hberaud[m] | or any other openstack deliverables | 12:49 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: yeah, but what is the future plan ? completly remove vmware from connection to openstack ? | 12:49 |
| hberaud[m] | no idea | 12:49 |
| hberaud[m] | that's more a question for services maintainers | 12:49 |
| hberaud[m] | aka nova | 12:49 |
| hberaud[m] | oslo just own and host the library, but we do not maintain the drivers | 12:50 |
| hberaud[m] | https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/NCBLEXRUTFINARPI3ACWNPORA3UG6YQW/ | 12:50 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: I'm not thinking of a specific date, but rather about an ideological decision—how does the OpenDev community itself approach this? Will there be pressure to remove VMware as a virtualization platform, considering it's essentially a competitor, and there's no reason to maintain support if it's just a waste of developer time? You get | 12:52 |
| kevko | what I mean… It would be good to decide now how to adjust the business plan, plan things accordingly, and so on. | 12:52 |
| hberaud[m] | apparently the actual trend is more oriented toward reducing vmware is support in openstack than increasing it support | 12:52 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: I'm sure you have long-term insider information :) | 12:53 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: yeah , but question was not aboud increase support :), question was about hard removal :) | 12:53 |
| hberaud[m] | well, I personnaly have no vision or any ideological plan on my side.... I just observed that this library is poorly maintained since a while, and that we are a team of 4 active persons to maintains more than 40 deliverables, so I was thinking that maybe, that could an opportunity to reduce our scope. Especially in the eventlet removal context, where oslo.vmware have to be migrated, so if this deliverable would have been identified | 12:58 |
| hberaud[m] | as "deprecatable" then that would have reduced the migration cost. | 12:58 |
| hberaud[m] | And I'm not aware of any long-term "insider" information. I just triggered this topic on my own ^ | 13:00 |
| kevko | hberaud[m]: Herve, thanks for the info. I'll discuss this internally within the company, with our customers, and possibly join the meeting as well to hear about the experiences and needs of others. | 13:00 |
| hberaud[m] | yeah, sure, you are welcome | 13:01 |
| hberaud[m] | and to be transparent, I think the same kind of proposal is true for oslo.rootwrap, so you can observe that I also put a line dedicated to the oslo.rootwrap case into our meeting agenda | 13:02 |
| opendevreview | Artem Vasilyev proposed openstack/oslo.metrics master: Restore group permissions to unix socket file https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.metrics/+/940526 | 14:08 |
| opendevreview | Adam McArthur proposed openstack/oslo.messaging master: Added Docs for Simulator https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/oslo.messaging/+/940495 | 19:07 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!