Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-22 Thread David Moreau Simard 
I'm really curious about this decision too.
Not so much about why the project wants to move out but more about
what it plans on doing in terms of contribution (code, issue)
workflow.

I happen to drive a project that's not OpenStack-specific either: ARA [1].
ARA was first created in GitHub and was "incubated" there until we
felt it was "good enough" to be proposed as an OpenStack ecosystem
project.

We chose the "OpenStack workflow" for two main reasons:
- The original authors were already intimate with it and we were very
satisfied with the rigid process it provided
- ARA would be used by different OpenStack projects and it would be a
good fit to be a part of the "family"

I did not find it hard to find *users* outside of the OpenStack
bubble, however, I still felt I needed to document a "FAQ" [2] about
how, yes, the project can be used outside of OpenStack.
It is definitely challenging to find contributors outside the
OpenStsack ecosystem, however. Even with an attempt at providing
simplified contribution guidelines [3].

Signing up for Launchpad and OpenStackid accounts, learning
git-review, setting up and using Gerrit and tracking things in
launchpad or storyboard are things we take for granted.
Whatever way we put it, though, it's a higher barrier to entry than
just browsing the GitHub repository and filing issues or creating pull
requests there.

So, what's the alternative ? Use the GitHub workflow ?
How well is this working out for projects that attracts (or intends to
attract) a lot of users and developers ?

Look at the Ansible GitHub repository [4] for an extreme case: 2600
contributors, more than 1700 issues and almost 1000 pull requests.
How do you make sense out of that ?

Ansible has had to create a bunch of custom software to wrap around
the workflow.
Triaging bots [5], custom tools [6] to sift through the amount of
content they have and so on.

I'm not saying the OpenStack workflow is better than the GitHub one --
just that there are pros and cons that the project must weigh based on
it's priorities and resources.

That said, I'll re-iterate that I'm really curious on what Gnocchi
intends on doing.

[1]: https://github.com/openstack/ara
[2]: 
http://ara.readthedocs.io/en/latest/faq.html#can-ara-be-used-outside-the-context-of-openstack-or-continuous-integration
[3]: http://ara.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html
[4]: https://github.com/ansible/ansible
[5]: https://github.com/ansible/ansibullbot
[6]: 
http://jctanner.mynetgear.com:5000/issuesearch/programmer-defection-vacuum/created_at/desc

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]


On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Ian Cordasco <sigmaviru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Friesen <chris.frie...@windriver.com>
> Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Date: March 20, 2017 at 11:39:38
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out
>
>> On 03/20/2017 10:10 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
>> > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> >
>> >> I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
>> >> release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
>> >> all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
>> >> specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
>> >> downstream of Telemetry.
>> >
>> > This simply isn't the case with gnocchi. Gnocchi is an independent
>> > timeseries, metrics and resources data service that _happens_ to
>> > work with OpenStack.
>> >
>> > By making it independent of OpenStack, its ability to draw
>> > contribution and engagement from people outside the OpenStack
>> > community increases. As a result it can become a better tool for
>> > more people, including OpenStack people. Not all, or even many, of
>> > the OpenStack projects are like that, but gnocchi is. More eyes,
>> > less bugs, right?
>>
>> I'm curious why being independent of OpenStack would make it more attractive.
>>
>> Is the perception that requiring people to sign the Contributor Agreement is
>> holding back external contribution? Or is it just that the mere idea of it
>> being an OpenStack project is discouraging people from getting involved?
>>
>> Just as an example, if I want to get involved with libvirt because I have an
>> itch to scratch the fact that it's basically a RedHat project isn't going to
>> turn me off...
>
> Contributing to OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Ian Cordasco 
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:10 PM, gordon chung  wrote:
>
>
> On 20/03/17 11:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>>
>> I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
>> release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
>> all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
>> specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
>> downstream of Telemetry.
>
> i believe the tightly coupled perception between gnocchi+ceilometer is a
> misconception. ceilometer can be configured to output to various targets
> that are not gnocchi. based on dev questions in irc, this is a common
> workflow that people are actively leveraging. aodh and panko are
> definitely more bound to ceilometer as they don't have any other sources
> (currently).
>
>>
>> Now, having Gnocchi out of the OpenStack infra is to me a step in the
>> wrong direction. We should aim at full integration with the rest of
>> OpenStack, not getting out.
>>
>
> i should re-iterate, this won't change our testing or integration.
> ceilometer has a gate that ensures compatibility with gnocchi as a
> target. this will remain and the auto-scaling
> aodh+ceilometer+gnocchi+heat use case will continue to be validated. not
> sure how we can quantify/qualify 'full integration' but we remain
> committed to ensuring gnocchi+ceilometer works.
>
> the use case for gnocchi is generic. if you have to store a bunch of
> timestamp+value data, use gnocchi. the use case definitely fits
> openstack's requirement, but i believe you can see it isn't just limited
> to that.
>
> i'm glad we have your opinion here, i had previously asked jd about
> effects on packaging and while i think Red Hat has a plan already, it'd
> be interesting to get your feedback on how this will affects other distros.

Keep in mind, that OpenStack inside of Debian is just Thomas for a
variety of reasons. Others have tried to help and are trying to help
and aren't really able to stick around.

The effects on downstreams shouldn't be significant. People packaging
Ceilometer likely already package Gnocchi. How those packagers choose
to consume deliverables is what will change. In a similar vein,
OpenStack Infra has a signing key for each release cycle that Gnocchi
is likely currently signed with when tarballs are released. You may
receive complaints that new releases aren't verifiable in the same
way, but that and needing a decent MANIFEST.in (assuming you're also
dropping your usage of PBR) will probably be the largest problems
(beyond where downstreams get the actual deliverable).

In the end, I think this should inform your decision but not make it.
-- 
Ian Cordasco

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread gordon chung 


On 20/03/17 11:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:

>
> I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
> release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
> all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
> specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
> downstream of Telemetry.

i believe the tightly coupled perception between gnocchi+ceilometer is a 
misconception. ceilometer can be configured to output to various targets 
that are not gnocchi. based on dev questions in irc, this is a common 
workflow that people are actively leveraging. aodh and panko are 
definitely more bound to ceilometer as they don't have any other sources 
(currently).

>
> Now, having Gnocchi out of the OpenStack infra is to me a step in the
> wrong direction. We should aim at full integration with the rest of
> OpenStack, not getting out.
>

i should re-iterate, this won't change our testing or integration. 
ceilometer has a gate that ensures compatibility with gnocchi as a 
target. this will remain and the auto-scaling 
aodh+ceilometer+gnocchi+heat use case will continue to be validated. not 
sure how we can quantify/qualify 'full integration' but we remain 
committed to ensuring gnocchi+ceilometer works.

the use case for gnocchi is generic. if you have to store a bunch of 
timestamp+value data, use gnocchi. the use case definitely fits 
openstack's requirement, but i believe you can see it isn't just limited 
to that.

i'm glad we have your opinion here, i had previously asked jd about 
effects on packaging and while i think Red Hat has a plan already, it'd 
be interesting to get your feedback on how this will affects other distros.

cheers,

-- 
gord

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Jeremy Stanley 
On 2017-03-20 12:57:17 -0400 (-0400), Ian Cordasco wrote:
[...]
> Contributing to OpenStack is intimidating, if not utterly
> discouraging, to people unfamiliar with CLAs and Gerrit. There's a lot
> of process that goes into contributing. Moving this to a friendlier
> (if not inferior) developer platform makes sense if there is interest
> from companies not interested in participating in the OpenStack
> community.

Agreed. Granted these are all things I think we can fix in time (and
we do have ideas or plans to address them), but it's taking a while
to turn the boat around and I can't blame projects for not wanting
to continue waiting it out.

Another point JD brought up in his review response to similar
questions I posed is that a lot of people see OpenStack projects
(rightly or wrongly) as tightly intertwined and assume that to use
any one service you need (at least some of) the others too. This was
a major takeaway from the joint BoD/TC/UC meeting earlier this
month, and the hope is that in the future we'll work collectively
toward making it easier for services to stand on their own and serve
independent use cases (as well as the use cases they serve in
concert today). Some OpenStack services are already there and others
are getting there, so it's a trend we're seeing start to solve
itself anyway.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Ian Cordasco 
-Original Message-
From: Chris Friesen <chris.frie...@windriver.com>
Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: March 20, 2017 at 11:39:38
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

> On 03/20/2017 10:10 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >
> >> I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
> >> release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
> >> all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
> >> specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
> >> downstream of Telemetry.
> >
> > This simply isn't the case with gnocchi. Gnocchi is an independent
> > timeseries, metrics and resources data service that _happens_ to
> > work with OpenStack.
> >
> > By making it independent of OpenStack, its ability to draw
> > contribution and engagement from people outside the OpenStack
> > community increases. As a result it can become a better tool for
> > more people, including OpenStack people. Not all, or even many, of
> > the OpenStack projects are like that, but gnocchi is. More eyes,
> > less bugs, right?
>
> I'm curious why being independent of OpenStack would make it more attractive.
>
> Is the perception that requiring people to sign the Contributor Agreement is
> holding back external contribution? Or is it just that the mere idea of it
> being an OpenStack project is discouraging people from getting involved?
>
> Just as an example, if I want to get involved with libvirt because I have an
> itch to scratch the fact that it's basically a RedHat project isn't going to
> turn me off...

Contributing to OpenStack is intimidating, if not utterly
discouraging, to people unfamiliar with CLAs and Gerrit. There's a lot
of process that goes into contributing. Moving this to a friendlier
(if not inferior) developer platform makes sense if there is interest
from companies not interested in participating in the OpenStack
community.

--
Ian Cordasco

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Chris Friesen 

On 03/20/2017 10:10 AM, Chris Dent wrote:

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Thomas Goirand wrote:


I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
downstream of Telemetry.


This simply isn't the case with gnocchi. Gnocchi is an independent
timeseries, metrics and resources data service that _happens_ to
work with OpenStack.

By making it independent of OpenStack, its ability to draw
contribution and engagement from people outside the OpenStack
community increases. As a result it can become a better tool for
more people, including OpenStack people. Not all, or even many, of
the OpenStack projects are like that, but gnocchi is. More eyes,
less bugs, right?


I'm curious why being independent of OpenStack would make it more attractive.

Is the perception that requiring people to sign the Contributor Agreement is 
holding back external contribution?  Or is it just that the mere idea of it 
being an OpenStack project is discouraging people from getting involved?


Just as an example, if I want to get involved with libvirt because I have an 
itch to scratch the fact that it's basically a RedHat project isn't going to 
turn me off...


Thanks,
Chris

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Chris Dent 

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Thomas Goirand wrote:


I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
downstream of Telemetry.


This simply isn't the case with gnocchi. Gnocchi is an independent
timeseries, metrics and resources data service that _happens_ to
work with OpenStack.

By making it independent of OpenStack, its ability to draw
contribution and engagement from people outside the OpenStack
community increases. As a result it can become a better tool for
more people, including OpenStack people. Not all, or even many, of
the OpenStack projects are like that, but gnocchi is. More eyes,
less bugs, right?

--
Chris Dent ¯\_(ツ)_/¯   https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Thomas Goirand 
On 03/20/2017 11:24 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> After a lot of talk within the Gnocchi team, it appeared to us that
> Gnocchi, which has been wisely tagged as 'independent' since its
> inception

I'm not sure I find this decision as fine as you do.

> has a lot of potential usage outside of OpenStack directly.

Any example?

> Being part of the big tent helped the project to be built, but it now
> appears that it restrains its adoption and contribution from users
> outside of the OpenStack realm.

Why?

> Therefore, the Gnocchi team has decided to move the project outside of
> the OpenStack Big Tent. As a first step, a patch has been submitted to
> the governance to delist the project from Telemetry:
> 
>   https://review.openstack.org/447438
> 
> As a second step, the project will likely move out of the OpenStack
> infrastructure in the future.

Of course, this is only the voice of an outsider, "only" doing the
packaging of the finalized code, so excuse me if it sounds like I don't
understand anything (probably it's the case). But...

I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being
release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that
all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a
specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or
downstream of Telemetry.

Now, having Gnocchi out of the OpenStack infra is to me a step in the
wrong direction. We should aim at full integration with the rest of
OpenStack, not getting out.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)


__
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-dev] [telemetry] Moving Gnocchi out

2017-03-20 Thread Julien Danjou 
Hi,

After a lot of talk within the Gnocchi team, it appeared to us that
Gnocchi, which has been wisely tagged as 'independent' since its
inception, has a lot of potential usage outside of OpenStack directly.

Being part of the big tent helped the project to be built, but it now
appears that it restrains its adoption and contribution from users
outside of the OpenStack realm.

Therefore, the Gnocchi team has decided to move the project outside of
the OpenStack Big Tent. As a first step, a patch has been submitted to
the governance to delist the project from Telemetry:

  https://review.openstack.org/447438

As a second step, the project will likely move out of the OpenStack
infrastructure in the future.

We expect Gnocchi to continue to thrive and be used by OpenStack, such
as Ceilometer, which Gnocchi is now its primary storage backend. Gnocchi
will also continue to be developed with support for OpenStack base
services.

And if you have any other question, feel free to ask us!

Cheers,
-- 
Julien Danjou
;; Free Software hacker
;; https://julien.danjou.info


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
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