Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Pavel Szalbot]

Hi everybody,

I suppose there will be a lot more people affected by removal of the
driver from Cinder who do not know about it. I am running production
clusters on Mitaka and Newton and did not know about the issue -
Openstack is quite a beast to keep pace with the updates.

Are there any news from dev team, Red Hat or Amye's radar?

-ps


On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Niels de Vos  wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Joe Julian  wrote:
>>
>> > On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.
>> >>
>> >>  Forwarded Message 
>> >> Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
>> >> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
>> >> From: Amye Scavarda  
>> >> To: Eric Harney  , Joe Julian
>> >>  , Vijay Bellur
>> >>  
>> >> CC: Amye Scavarda  
>> >>
>> >> Eric,
>> >> I'm sorry to hear this.
>> >> I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
>> >> supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
>> >> provide to resolve this.
>> >> It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
>> >> meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
>> >> meet this gateway?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!
>> >> -- amye
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> >>> >> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>> >>> >>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
>> >>> >>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
>> >>> >>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
>> >>> >>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Hi Joe,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I can fill in on the rationale here.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI platform to
>> >>> > test that driver and report results against all patchsets submitted to
>> >>> > Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet once
>> >>> the
>> >>> > Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at
>> >>> Red Hat.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
>> >>> > running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release notes for
>> >>> > the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was probably not
>> >>> > communicated widely enough.)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about this.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this driver
>> >>> > back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone
>> >>> stepping
>> >>> > in in a big way to maintain it.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thanks,
>> >>> > Eric
>> >>>
>> >>> Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
>> >>> abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm disappointed.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> > I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of
>> > investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good
>> > company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the
>> > management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent
>> > reason for their decision.
>> >
>> >
>> > Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the
>> > Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the developers
>> > in community meetings would probably help with that feeling of being
>> > disconnected, in my own personal opinion).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>> Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and gluster-devel
>> >>> mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take ownership of
>> >>> this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my $dayjob has
>> >>> gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited free time
>> >>> that I can donate.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> > Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric get
>> > back to any of you?
>> >
>> >
>> > Haven't heard anything more, no.
>> >
>> >
>>  Policies for maintaining an active driver in cinder can be found at [1]
>> and [2]. We will need some work to let the driver be active again (after a
>> revert of the commit that removed the driver from cinder) and provide CI
>> support as entailed in [2].
>>
>> I will co-ordinate further internal discussions within Red Hat on this
>> topic and provide an update soon on how we can proceed here.
>
> The hole discussion is 

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Joe Julian]

On 05/30/2017 03:52 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:

On 05/30/2017 06:37 PM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/30/2017 03:24 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:

On 05/27/2017 03:02 AM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:



On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian > wrote:


Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
From: Amye Scavarda  

To: Eric Harney  
, Joe
Julian  , Vijay 
Bellur

 
CC: Amye Scavarda  



Eric,
I'm sorry to hear this.
I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS 
CI which
supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll 
need to

provide to resolve this.
It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. 
In the
meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for 
requirements to

meet this gateway?

Thanks!
-- amye

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian > wrote:

On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and 
removed from
>>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was 
attempting to
>>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor 
discussion of that

>>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I can fill in on the rationale here.
>
> Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a 
CI platform to
> test that driver and report results against all 
patchsets submitted to
> Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could 
not meet

once the
> Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active 
development target at

Red Hat.
>
> This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver 
for anyone
> running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder 
release notes for
> the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this 
was probably not

> communicated widely enough.)
>
> I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster 
community about this.

>
> If someone from the Gluster world is interested in 
bringing this driver
> back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require 
someone

stepping
> in in a big way to maintain it.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank 
was not an
abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm 
disappointed.



I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the 
kind of investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is 
a pretty good company and really open. I never had any trouble 
saying something the management did is wrong when I strongly felt 
and they would give a decent reason for their decision.


Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not 
the Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the 
developers in community meetings would probably help with that 
feeling of being disconnected, in my own personal opinion).


As a community, each member needs to make sure that their specific 
use case has the resources it needs to flourish. If some team cares 
about Gluster in openstack, they should step forward and provide the 
engineering and hardware resources needed to make it succeed.


Red Hat has and continues to pour resources into Gluster - Gluster 
is thriving. We have loads of work going on with gluster in RHEV, 
Kubernetes, NFS Ganesha and Samba.


What we are not doing and that has been clear for many years now is 
to invest in Gluster in openstack.


Again, nobody communicated with either the Openstack nor the Gluster 
communities about this, short of deprecation warnings which are not 
the most effective way of reaching people (that may be wrong on the 
part of most users, but unfortunately it's a reality). Red Hat wasn't 
interested in investing in Gluster on Openstack anymore. That's fine. 
It's your money. As a community leader, proponent, and champion, 
however, Red Hat should have at least invested in finding an 
interested party to take over the effort - imho.


I think it is 100% disingenuous to position this as a surprise 
withdrawal of Gluster from Red Hat from openstack. The position we 
have had with what we have focused on with Gluster has been 
exceedingly clear for years.


I 

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Ric Wheeler]

On 05/30/2017 06:37 PM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/30/2017 03:24 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:

On 05/27/2017 03:02 AM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:



On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian > wrote:


Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
From: Amye Scavarda  
To: Eric Harney  , Joe
Julian  , Vijay Bellur
 
CC: Amye Scavarda  



Eric,
I'm sorry to hear this.
I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
provide to resolve this.
It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
meet this gateway?

Thanks!
-- amye

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian > wrote:

On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
>>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
>>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
>>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I can fill in on the rationale here.
>
> Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI 
platform to
> test that driver and report results against all patchsets 
submitted to

> Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet
once the
> Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at
Red Hat.
>
> This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
> running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release 
notes for
> the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was 
probably not

> communicated widely enough.)
>
> I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about 
this.

>
> If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this 
driver

> back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone
stepping
> in in a big way to maintain it.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm 
disappointed.



I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of 
investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good 
company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the 
management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent 
reason for their decision.


Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the 
Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the developers 
in community meetings would probably help with that feeling of being 
disconnected, in my own personal opinion).


As a community, each member needs to make sure that their specific use case 
has the resources it needs to flourish. If some team cares about Gluster in 
openstack, they should step forward and provide the engineering and hardware 
resources needed to make it succeed.


Red Hat has and continues to pour resources into Gluster - Gluster is 
thriving. We have loads of work going on with gluster in RHEV, Kubernetes, 
NFS Ganesha and Samba.


What we are not doing and that has been clear for many years now is to invest 
in Gluster in openstack.


Again, nobody communicated with either the Openstack nor the Gluster 
communities about this, short of deprecation warnings which are not the most 
effective way of reaching people (that may be wrong on the part of most users, 
but unfortunately it's a reality). Red Hat wasn't interested in investing in 
Gluster on Openstack anymore. That's fine. It's your money. As a community 
leader, proponent, and champion, however, Red Hat should have at least 
invested in finding an interested party to take over the effort - imho.


I think it is 100% disingenuous to position this as a surprise withdrawal of 
Gluster from Red Hat from openstack. The position we have had with what we have 
focused on with Gluster has been exceedingly clear for years.


As Eric pointed out, this was a warning in the Neutron code and was 

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Joe Julian]

On 05/30/2017 03:24 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:

On 05/27/2017 03:02 AM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:



On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian > wrote:


Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
From: Amye Scavarda  
To: Eric Harney  
, Joe

Julian  , Vijay Bellur
 
CC: Amye Scavarda  



Eric,
I'm sorry to hear this.
I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS 
CI which
supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll 
need to

provide to resolve this.
It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. 
In the
meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for 
requirements to

meet this gateway?

Thanks!
-- amye

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian > wrote:

On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and 
removed from
>>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was 
attempting to
>>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor 
discussion of that

>>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I can fill in on the rationale here.
>
> Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI 
platform to
> test that driver and report results against all patchsets 
submitted to
> Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not 
meet

once the
> Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development 
target at

Red Hat.
>
> This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver 
for anyone
> running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder 
release notes for
> the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was 
probably not

> communicated widely enough.)
>
> I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community 
about this.

>
> If someone from the Gluster world is interested in 
bringing this driver
> back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require 
someone

stepping
> in in a big way to maintain it.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was 
not an
abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm 
disappointed.



I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the 
kind of investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a 
pretty good company and really open. I never had any trouble saying 
something the management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they 
would give a decent reason for their decision.


Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the 
Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the 
developers in community meetings would probably help with that 
feeling of being disconnected, in my own personal opinion).


As a community, each member needs to make sure that their specific use 
case has the resources it needs to flourish. If some team cares about 
Gluster in openstack, they should step forward and provide the 
engineering and hardware resources needed to make it succeed.


Red Hat has and continues to pour resources into Gluster - Gluster is 
thriving. We have loads of work going on with gluster in RHEV, 
Kubernetes, NFS Ganesha and Samba.


What we are not doing and that has been clear for many years now is to 
invest in Gluster in openstack.


Again, nobody communicated with either the Openstack nor the Gluster 
communities about this, short of deprecation warnings which are not the 
most effective way of reaching people (that may be wrong on the part of 
most users, but unfortunately it's a reality). Red Hat wasn't interested 
in investing in Gluster on Openstack anymore. That's fine. It's your 
money. As a community leader, proponent, and champion, however, Red Hat 
should have at least invested in finding an interested party to take 
over the effort - imho.








Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and 
gluster-devel
mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take 
ownership of
this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my 
$dayjob has
gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my 
limited 

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Ric Wheeler]

On 05/27/2017 03:02 AM, Joe Julian wrote:

On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:



On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian > wrote:


Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject:Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
Date:   Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
From:   Amye Scavarda  
To: Eric Harney  , 
Joe
Julian  , Vijay Bellur
 
CC: Amye Scavarda  



Eric,
I'm sorry to hear this.
I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
provide to resolve this.
It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
meet this gateway?

Thanks!
-- amye

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian > wrote:

On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
>>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
>>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
>>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I can fill in on the rationale here.
>
> Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI platform to
> test that driver and report results against all patchsets submitted to
> Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet
once the
> Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at
Red Hat.
>
> This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
> running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release notes 
for
> the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was probably 
not
> communicated widely enough.)
>
> I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about this.
>
> If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this 
driver
> back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone
stepping
> in in a big way to maintain it.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm disappointed.


I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of 
investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good 
company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the 
management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent 
reason for their decision.


Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the Gluster 
team's fault though (although more participation of the developers in 
community meetings would probably help with that feeling of being 
disconnected, in my own personal opinion).


As a community, each member needs to make sure that their specific use case has 
the resources it needs to flourish. If some team cares about Gluster in 
openstack, they should step forward and provide the engineering and hardware 
resources needed to make it succeed.


Red Hat has and continues to pour resources into Gluster - Gluster is thriving. 
We have loads of work going on with gluster in RHEV, Kubernetes, NFS Ganesha and 
Samba.


What we are not doing and that has been clear for many years now is to invest in 
Gluster in openstack.






Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and gluster-devel
mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take ownership of
this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my $dayjob has
gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited free time
that I can donate.


Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric get back 
to any of you?


Haven't heard anything more, no.


Who in the community that is using gluster in openstack is willing to help with 
their own time and resources to meet the openstack requirements?


Ric

___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Niels de Vos]

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Vijay Bellur wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Joe Julian  wrote:
> 
> > On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian  wrote:
> >
> >> Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.
> >>
> >>  Forwarded Message 
> >> Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
> >> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
> >> From: Amye Scavarda  
> >> To: Eric Harney  , Joe Julian
> >>  , Vijay Bellur
> >>  
> >> CC: Amye Scavarda  
> >>
> >> Eric,
> >> I'm sorry to hear this.
> >> I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
> >> supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
> >> provide to resolve this.
> >> It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
> >> meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
> >> meet this gateway?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >> -- amye
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
> >>> >> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
> >>> >>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
> >>> >>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
> >>> >>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
> >>> >>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Hi Joe,
> >>> >
> >>> > I can fill in on the rationale here.
> >>> >
> >>> > Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI platform to
> >>> > test that driver and report results against all patchsets submitted to
> >>> > Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet once
> >>> the
> >>> > Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at
> >>> Red Hat.
> >>> >
> >>> > This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
> >>> > running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release notes for
> >>> > the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was probably not
> >>> > communicated widely enough.)
> >>> >
> >>> > I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about this.
> >>> >
> >>> > If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this driver
> >>> > back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone
> >>> stepping
> >>> > in in a big way to maintain it.
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks,
> >>> > Eric
> >>>
> >>> Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
> >>> abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm disappointed.
> >>>
> >>
> > I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of
> > investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good
> > company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the
> > management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent
> > reason for their decision.
> >
> >
> > Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the
> > Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the developers
> > in community meetings would probably help with that feeling of being
> > disconnected, in my own personal opinion).
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and gluster-devel
> >>> mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take ownership of
> >>> this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my $dayjob has
> >>> gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited free time
> >>> that I can donate.
> >>>
> >>
> > Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric get
> > back to any of you?
> >
> >
> > Haven't heard anything more, no.
> >
> >
>  Policies for maintaining an active driver in cinder can be found at [1]
> and [2]. We will need some work to let the driver be active again (after a
> revert of the commit that removed the driver from cinder) and provide CI
> support as entailed in [2].
> 
> I will co-ordinate further internal discussions within Red Hat on this
> topic and provide an update soon on how we can proceed here.

The hole discussion is about integration of Gluster in . I
would really appreciate to see the discussion in the public, on the
integrat...@gluster.org list. This is a low-traffic list, specially
dedicated to these kind of topics. Having the discussion in archives
will surely help to track the history of decisions that were taken. We
should try hard to prevent (removal of) integration surprises in the
future.

Let me know if you need any assistance with this, I offered to start the
discussion during last IRC meeting and am willing to follow 

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Vijay Bellur]

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Joe Julian  wrote:

> On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian  wrote:
>
>> Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.
>>
>>  Forwarded Message 
>> Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
>> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
>> From: Amye Scavarda  
>> To: Eric Harney  , Joe Julian
>>  , Vijay Bellur
>>  
>> CC: Amye Scavarda  
>>
>> Eric,
>> I'm sorry to hear this.
>> I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
>> supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
>> provide to resolve this.
>> It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
>> meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
>> meet this gateway?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> -- amye
>>
>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian  wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>>> >> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> >>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
>>> >>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
>>> >>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
>>> >>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> > Hi Joe,
>>> >
>>> > I can fill in on the rationale here.
>>> >
>>> > Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI platform to
>>> > test that driver and report results against all patchsets submitted to
>>> > Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet once
>>> the
>>> > Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at
>>> Red Hat.
>>> >
>>> > This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
>>> > running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release notes for
>>> > the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was probably not
>>> > communicated widely enough.)
>>> >
>>> > I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about this.
>>> >
>>> > If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this driver
>>> > back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone
>>> stepping
>>> > in in a big way to maintain it.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Eric
>>>
>>> Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
>>> abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm disappointed.
>>>
>>
> I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of
> investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good
> company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the
> management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent
> reason for their decision.
>
>
> Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the
> Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the developers
> in community meetings would probably help with that feeling of being
> disconnected, in my own personal opinion).
>
>
>
>>
>>> Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and gluster-devel
>>> mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take ownership of
>>> this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my $dayjob has
>>> gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited free time
>>> that I can donate.
>>>
>>
> Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric get
> back to any of you?
>
>
> Haven't heard anything more, no.
>
>
 Policies for maintaining an active driver in cinder can be found at [1]
and [2]. We will need some work to let the driver be active again (after a
revert of the commit that removed the driver from cinder) and provide CI
support as entailed in [2].

I will co-ordinate further internal discussions within Red Hat on this
topic and provide an update soon on how we can proceed here.

Thanks,
Vijay

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/how-to-contribute-a-driver

[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Joe Julian]

On 05/26/2017 11:38 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:



On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian > wrote:


Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject:Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
Date:   Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
From:   Amye Scavarda  
To: Eric Harney  ,
Joe Julian  , Vijay
Bellur  
CC: Amye Scavarda  



Eric,
I'm sorry to hear this.
I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI
which supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort
we'll need to provide to resolve this.
It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In
the meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for
requirements to meet this gateway?

Thanks!
-- amye

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian > wrote:

On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and
removed from
>>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was
attempting to
>>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion
of that
>>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>>>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I can fill in on the rationale here.
>
> Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI
platform to
> test that driver and report results against all patchsets
submitted to
> Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not
meet once the
> Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development
target at Red Hat.
>
> This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for
anyone
> running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder
release notes for
> the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was
probably not
> communicated widely enough.)
>
> I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community
about this.
>
> If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing
this driver
> back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require
someone stepping
> in in a big way to maintain it.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric

Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm
disappointed.


I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the 
kind of investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a 
pretty good company and really open. I never had any trouble saying 
something the management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they 
would give a decent reason for their decision.


Happy to hear that. Still looks like meddling to an outsider. Not the 
Gluster team's fault though (although more participation of the 
developers in community meetings would probably help with that feeling 
of being disconnected, in my own personal opinion).




Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and
gluster-devel
mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take
ownership of
this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my
$dayjob has
gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited
free time
that I can donate.


Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric 
get back to any of you?


Haven't heard anything more, no.

-- 
Amye Scavarda | a...@redhat.com  | Gluster

Community Lead

___
Gluster-users mailing list
gluster-us...@gluster.org 
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users





--
Pranith


___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Fwd: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder

[Pranith Kumar Karampuri]

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Joe Julian  wrote:

> Forwarded for posterity and follow-up.
>
>  Forwarded Message 
> Subject: Re: GlusterFS removal from Openstack Cinder
> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:07:27 +
> From: Amye Scavarda  
> To: Eric Harney  , Joe Julian
>  , Vijay Bellur 
> 
> CC: Amye Scavarda  
>
> Eric,
> I'm sorry to hear this.
> I'm reaching out internally (within Gluster CI team and CentOS CI which
> supports Gluster) to get an idea of the level of effort we'll need to
> provide to resolve this.
> It'll take me a few days to get this, but this is on my radar. In the
> meantime, is there somewhere I should be looking at for requirements to
> meet this gateway?
>
> Thanks!
> -- amye
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 16:09 Joe Julian  wrote:
>
>> On 05/05/2017 12:54 PM, Eric Harney wrote:
>> >> On 04/28/2017 12:41 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
>> >>> I learned, today, that GlusterFS was deprecated and removed from
>> >>> Cinder as one of our #gluster (freenode) users was attempting to
>> >>> upgrade openstack. I could find no rational nor discussion of that
>> >>> removal. Could you please educate me about that decision?
>> >>>
>> >
>> > Hi Joe,
>> >
>> > I can fill in on the rationale here.
>> >
>> > Keeping a driver in the Cinder tree requires running a CI platform to
>> > test that driver and report results against all patchsets submitted to
>> > Cinder.  This is a fairly large burden, which we could not meet once the
>> > Gluster Cinder driver was no longer an active development target at Red
>> Hat.
>> >
>> > This was communicated via a warning issued by the driver for anyone
>> > running the OpenStack Newton code, and via the Cinder release notes for
>> > the Ocata release.  (I can see in retrospect that this was probably not
>> > communicated widely enough.)
>> >
>> > I apologize for not reaching out to the Gluster community about this.
>> >
>> > If someone from the Gluster world is interested in bringing this driver
>> > back, I can help coordinate there.  But it will require someone stepping
>> > in in a big way to maintain it.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Eric
>>
>> Ah, Red Hat's statement that the acquisition of InkTank was not an
>> abandonment of Gluster seems rather disingenuous now. I'm disappointed.
>>
>
I am a Red Hat employee working on gluster and I am happy with the kind of
investments the company did in GlusterFS. Still am. It is a pretty good
company and really open. I never had any trouble saying something the
management did is wrong when I strongly felt and they would give a decent
reason for their decision.


>
>> Would you please start a thread on the gluster-users and gluster-devel
>> mailing lists and see if there's anyone willing to take ownership of
>> this. I'm certainly willing to participate as well but my $dayjob has
>> gone more kubernetes than openstack so I have only my limited free time
>> that I can donate.
>>
>
Do we know what would maintaining cinder as active entail? Did Eric get
back to any of you?


> --
> Amye Scavarda | a...@redhat.com | Gluster Community Lead
>
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> gluster-us...@gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>



-- 
Pranith
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel