Amrith, A year and few months is sufficient notice: http://markmail.org/message/geijiljch4yxfcvq
I really really want this to go away. Every time this comes up, example it came up in Austin too, a few people raise their hands and then do not show up. (Not saying you will do the same!). -- Dims On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Amrith Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > Does it make sense that this conversation about the merits of nova-docker be > had before the retirement is actually initiated. It seems odd that in the > face of empirical evidence of actual use (user survey) we merely hypothesize > that people are likely using their own forks and therefore it is fine to > retire this project. > > As ttx indicates there is nothing wrong with a project with low activity. > That said, if the issue is that nova-docker is not actively maintained and > broken, then what it needs is contributors not retirement. > > -amrith > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 5:03 AM >> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][nova-docker] Retiring nova-docker >> project >> >> On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 10:11:59AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> > Matt Riedemann wrote: >> > > [...] >> > > Expand the numbers to 6 months and you'll see only 13 commits. >> > > >> > > It's surprisingly high in the user survey (page 39): >> > > >> > > https://www.openstack.org/assets/survey/April-2016-User-Survey- >> Report.pdf >> > > >> > > So I suspect most users/deployments are just running their own forks. >> > >> > Why ? Is it completely unusable as it stands ? 13 commits in 6 months >> sounds >> > like enough activity to keep something usable (if it was usable in the >> first >> > place). We have a lot of (official) projects and libraries with less >> > activity than that :) >> > >> > I'm not sure we should be retiring an unofficial project if it's usable, >> > doesn't have critical security issues and is used by a number of >> people... >> > Now, if it's unusable and abandoned, that's another story. >> >> Nova explicitly provides *zero* stable APIs for out of tree drivers to >> use. Changes to Nova internals will reliably break out of tree drivers >> at least once during a development cycle, often more. So you really do >> need someone committed to updating out of tree drivers to cope with the >> fact that they're using an explicitly unstable API. We actively intend >> to keep breaking out of tree drivers as often as suits Nova's best >> interests. >> >> Regards, >> Daniel >> -- >> |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ >> :| >> |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org >> :| >> |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ >> :| >> |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc >> :| >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
