On 2/12/15, 1:33 PM, "Chmouel Boudjnah" <chmo...@enovance.com> wrote:
>Jaume Devesa <devv...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Following the conversation... >> >> We have seen that glusterfs[1] and ec2api[2] use different approach >> when it comes to repository managing: whereas glusterfs is a single >> 'devstack' directory repository, ec2api is a whole project with a >> 'devstack' directory on it. >> >> We plan to migrate 'python-neutron-plugin-midonet'[3] project to >> Stackforge too. It makes sense to add the 'devstack' directory on it? >> Or do you recommend us to have two different repositories in >> Stackforge: one for the neutron plugin and the other one for the >> devstack plugin? > >as you stated I don't think there is a clear advantage or disadvantage >but IMO having too many repositories is not very user friendly and I would >recommend to have the plugin directly in the repo. > >For things like glusterfs which is not a native openstack project it >makes sense that the plugin is hosted externally of the project. I am in favor of having these in the devstack reop. I think that keeping everything under the same umbrella is the healthiest model. Moving things to different repos is a a challenge and leads to endless problems (that is my two cents) > >Chmouel > >__________________________________________________________________________ >OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
