On 10/10/2014 06:10 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > On 09/10/14 23:44, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> On Oct 9, 2014, at 4:30 PM, Matt Riedemann >> <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >>> The sqlalchemy-migrate project is basically maintenance mode and >>> the core team [1] is kind of a weird mix of people - all great >>> people I'm sure, but I think it's more a team of people that >>> stepped up when OpenStack took over the project and said they'd >>> babysit it but it's pretty idle. >>> >>> Given we have oslo.db now, and sqlalchemy-migrate is all DB >>> goodies, can we just have the oslo.db core team [2] own >>> sqlalchemy-migrate now too? >>> >>> Here are the sqlalchemy-migrate open reviews: >>> >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:stackforge/sqlalchemy-migrate,n,z >>> >>> >>> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/186,members >>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/331,members > >> If the oslo.db team wants to participate, that’s obviously fine, >> but I don’t think we want to just add everyone in bulk. AIUI, the >> team’s goal is to get the migration stuff in oslo.db working with >> alembic so we can stop using sqlalchemy-migrate. > > Till that time, we're left with the library used by multiple projects. > I feel it's hard to get any review in meaningful time for the library, > so if moving the library under the oslo.db tent will help it move, I'm > both hands for that. > > /Ihar
I'm not sure adding core reviewers would help, but I agree we have a maintenance issue with sqlalchemy-migrate. I've seen useful patches staging without core reviewer answers. I'm myself a core there, but I don't think I have the needed level to do good reviews. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev