Hi Ihar, I’m actually in favor of option 2, but it implies a few things about your time, and I wanted to chat with you before presuming.
Maintenance can not involve breaking changes. At this point, the co-gate will block it. Also, oslo graduation changes will have to be made in the services repos first, and then Neutron. Thanks, doug On 12/15/14, 6:15 AM, "Ihar Hrachyshka" <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA512 > >Hi all, > >the question arose recently in one of reviews for neutron-*aas repos >to remove all oslo-incubator code from those repos since it's >duplicated in neutron main repo. (You can find the link to the review >at the end of the email.) > >Brief hostory: neutron repo was recently split into 4 pieces (main, >neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, and neutron-vpnaas). The split resulted >in each repository keeping their own copy of >neutron/openstack/common/... tree (currently unused in all >neutron-*aas repos that are still bound to modules from main repo). > >As a oslo liaison for the project, I wonder what's the best way to >manage oslo-incubator files. We have several options: > >1. just kill all the neutron/openstack/common/ trees from neutron-*aas >repositories and continue using modules from main repo. > >2. kill all duplicate modules from neutron-*aas repos and leave only >those that are used in those repos but not in main repo. > >3. fully duplicate all those modules in each of four repos that use them. > >I think option 1. is a straw man, since we should be able to introduce >new oslo-incubator modules into neutron-*aas repos even if they are >not used in main repo. > >Option 2. is good when it comes to synching non-breaking bug fixes (or >security fixes) from oslo-incubator, in that it will require only one >sync patch instead of e.g. four. At the same time there may be >potential issues when synchronizing updates from oslo-incubator that >would break API and hence require changes to each of the modules that >use it. Since we don't support atomic merges for multiple projects in >gate, we will need to be cautious about those updates, and we will >still need to leave neutron-*aas repos broken for some time (though >the time may be mitigated with care). > >Option 3. is vice versa - in theory, you get total decoupling, meaning >no oslo-incubator updates in main repo are expected to break >neutron-*aas repos, but bug fixing becomes a huge PITA. > >I would vote for option 2., for two reasons: >- - most oslo-incubator syncs are non-breaking, and we may effectively >apply care to updates that may result in potential breakage (f.e. >being able to trigger an integrated run for each of neutron-*aas repos >with the main sync patch, if there are any concerns). >- - it will make oslo liaison life a lot easier. OK, I'm probably too >selfish on that. ;) >- - it will make stable maintainers life a lot easier. The main reason >why stable maintainers and distributions like recent oslo graduation >movement is that we don't need to track each bug fix we need in every >project, and waste lots of cycles on it. Being able to fix a bug in >one place only is *highly* anticipated. [OK, I'm quite selfish on that >one too.] >- - it's a delusion that there will be no neutron-main syncs that will >break neutron-*aas repos ever. There can still be problems due to >incompatibility between neutron main and neutron-*aas code resulted >EXACTLY because multiple parts of the same process use different >versions of the same module. > >That said, Doug Wiegley (lbaas core) seems to be in favour of option >3. due to lower coupling that is achieved in that way. I know that >lbaas team had a bad experience due to tight coupling to neutron >project in the past, so I appreciate their concerns. > >All in all, we should come up with some standard solution for both >advanced services that are already split out, *and* upcoming vendor >plugin shrinking initiative. > >The initial discussion is captured at: >https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141427/ > >Thanks, >/Ihar >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) > >iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUju0NAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57n5YH/jA4l5DsLgRpw9gYsoSWVGvh >apmJ4UlnAKhxzc787XImz1VA+ztSyIwAUdEdcfq3gkinP58q7o48oIXOGjFXaBNq >6qBePC1hflEqZ85Hm4/i5z51qutjW0dyi4y4C6FHgM5NsEkhbh0QIa/u8Hr4F1q6 >tkr0kDbCbDkiZ8IX1l74VGWQ3QvCNeJkANUg79BqGq+qIVP3BeOHyWqRmpLZFQ6E >QiUwhiYv5l4HekCEQN8PWisJoqnhbTNjvLBnLD82IitLd5vXnsXfSkxKhv9XeOg/ >czLUCyr/nJg4aw8Qm0DTjnZxS+BBe5De0Ke4zm2AGePgFYcai8YQPtuOfSJDbXk= >=D6Gn >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev