On 04/27/2015 08:52 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> 
>     Any project that fails to meet the criteria later can be dropped at any
>     time.  For example, if some repo is clearly unmaintained, it can be
>     removed.
> 
> 
> If we open the door to excluding projects down the road, then wouldn't
> we need to take into account some form of 3rd party CI validation as
> part of the criteria to 'ensure quality' (or lack thereof)? Would you
> consider that part of the inclusion criteria too?

My suggestion would be to use the state of 3rd party CI validation in
whatever is used to indicate the current level of maturity, but not to
directly decide what's considered in the OpenStack Neutron project.

If we take networking-ovn as an example, it's very actively developed
and certainly "one of us", in my opinion.  It has CI jobs, but they're
not running tempest yet.  It seems wrong to say it's not an OpenStack
project because of that.  What we need is to be able to clearly
communicate that it's very new and immature, which is something different.

For something that has been around much longer and has had CI fully
working, I would view it a bit different.  If the tests break and stay
broken for a long time, that sounds like an early indicator that the
code is unmaintained and may get dropped and moved to "openstack-attic"
at some point.

-- 
Russell Bryant

__________________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to