On 08/08/2013 06:49 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:39:44AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: >> What do you mean by "dangerous code merging" in the subject? The body of >> your mail doesn't make any reference to whatever "danger" you're seeing. >> >> On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 14:16 +0400, Boris Pavlovic wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Could somebody answer me, why we are merging oslo code in other projects >>> and don't use >>> git submodules (http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Submodules) >> >> The idea of using submodules has come a few times. I don't have a >> fundamental objection to it, except any time I've seen submodules used >> in a project they've been extremely painful for everyone involved. >> >> I'd be happy to look at a demo of a submodule based system for projects >> to use code from oslo-incubator. > > submodules certainly could work as a way to avoid the cut+paste > approach we currently do. I agree though that they do add an > extra layer of pain & suffering for developers who don't fully > understand what they're doing. We use them in libvirt and try > to hide the pain behind clever scripts which attempt to keep > the submodule properly synced, but we still get pretty frequent > problem reports from devs who've managed to get themselves into > a mess with the submodule state. > > If we want to improve our interaction with oslo then IMHO more > effort should be spent on turning bits of oslo-incubator into > stable, standalone modules, removing the cut+paste need entirely.
Yep, and that's pretty much where this conversation always lands. oslo.config is already a nice library. oslo.messaging is well on its way. I'm pretty sure Mark would welcome more help on Oslo to help push forward on other parts. :-) I think all the right things are being done here. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
