On Jun 29, 2012, at 1:50 AM, Dan Wendlandt wrote: > Hi folks, > > Ryota from NEC sent an email to the list earlier tonight about pushing their > NEC Quantum plugin (currently hosted outside of the main Quantum repo), into > the main Quantum repo. As some of you will recall, at the Folsom summit we > talked a bit about whether plugins should be in core and if so, what the > requirements would be around allowing a plugin to be in the main repo. > > My personal feeling is that having plugins be part of a single centralized > community repository is a good thing for a couple of reasons: > 1) it simplifies and increases the sharing of code and ideas across different > plugins. > 2) it promotes a more cohesive community around quantum, encouraging people > to contribute not only to their plugin, but to community projects as well. > 3) it potentially makes it easier for someone to understand if a code change > (e.g., at the db plugin base layer) breaks any particular plugin. > I agree with all these points, these are the main reasons I think having plugins in the Quantum repo is the way to go.
> However, for this approach to work, I think we need to make sure that at > least one core quantum developer is committed to maintaining the plugin. Why > a core member? Because being core represents a significant commitment to > understanding the does and don'ts of Quantum, which that maintainer can help > enforce with respect to the plugin code. A core developer also presents a > commit to the community as a whole, which means other core developers will be > motivated to return the favor and reivew/fix issues within the plugin. > I agree with this, and both Sumit's and Salvatore's comments as well. Making someone a core dev from their plugin submission means they need to get involved in other community activities as well. This will also increase the number of core devs, and it may gate plugins for which authors are not up to the task or time commitment. They still have the option of maintaining their plugin outside the Quantum repo. Thanks, Kyle > Obviously, we don't want these requirements to be so high that they > discourage people from building and pushing plugin code to the main repo, > because as I mentioned above, I think there are a lot of advantages to having > plugins in a shared location. The core dev might be the primary developer of > the plugin itself, or it might be an existing core developer who is simply > motivated to work with the existing developers to help make sure the plugin > stays in good shape and questions on the ML or launchpad get answered in a > reasonable fashion. > > At this point, I would think that all plugins in the repo meet these > criteria, with the exception of the Ryu plugin, as we haven't really had much > contact with those authors since the initial contribution. > > What do others think about this topic? What's the right trade-off? > > Dan > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Dan Wendlandt > Nicira, Inc: www.nicira.com > twitter: danwendlandt > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack > Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
