I have raised my concerns on the proposal. I think that all plugins should be 
treated on an equal footing. My main concern is having the ML2 plugin in tree 
whilst the others will be moved out of tree will be problematic. I think that 
the model will be complete if the ML2 was also out of tree. This will help 
crystalize the idea and make sure that the model works correctly.

From: "Armando M." <arma...@gmail.com<mailto:arma...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: OpenStack List 
Date: Saturday, December 6, 2014 at 1:04 AM
To: OpenStack List 
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Core/Vendor code decomposition

Hi folks,

For a few weeks now the Neutron team has worked tirelessly on [1].

This initiative stems from the fact that as the project matures, evolution of 
processes and contribution guidelines need to evolve with it. This is to ensure 
that the project can keep on thriving in order to meet the needs of an ever 
growing community.

The effort of documenting intentions, and fleshing out the various details of 
the proposal is about to reach an end, and we'll soon kick the tires to put the 
proposal into practice. Since the spec has grown pretty big, I'll try to 
capture the tl;dr below.

If you have any comment please do not hesitate to raise them here and/or reach 
out to us.

tl;dr >>>

>From the Kilo release, we'll initiate a set of steps to change the following 

  *   Code structure: every plugin or driver that exists or wants to exist as 
part of Neutron project is decomposed in an slim vendor integration (which 
lives in the Neutron repo), plus a bulkier vendor library (which lives in an 
independent publicly available repo);
  *   Contribution process: this extends to the following aspects:
     *   Design and Development: the process is largely unchanged for the part 
that pertains the vendor integration; the maintainer team is fully auto 
governed for the design and development of the vendor library;
     *   Testing and Continuous Integration: maintainers will be required to 
support their vendor integration with 3rd CI testing; the requirements for 3rd 
CI testing are largely unchanged;
     *   Defect management: the process is largely unchanged, issues affecting 
the vendor library can be tracked with whichever tool/process the maintainer 
see fit. In cases where vendor library fixes need to be reflected in the vendor 
integration, the usual OpenStack defect management apply.
     *   Documentation: there will be some changes to the way plugins and 
drivers are documented with the intention of promoting discoverability of the 
integrated solutions.
  *   Adoption and transition plan: we strongly advise maintainers to stay 
abreast of the developments of this effort, as their code, their CI, etc will 
be affected. The core team will provide guidelines and support throughout this 
cycle the ensure a smooth transition.

To learn more, please refer to [1].

Many thanks,

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/134680
OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to