-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 16/12/14 12:50, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Dec 16, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> Signed PGP part On 15/12/14 18:57, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> There may be a similar problem managing dependencies on >>> libraries that live outside of either tree. I assume you >>> already decided how to handle that. Are you doing the same >>> thing, and adding the requirements to neutron’s lists? >> >> I guess the idea is to keep in neutron-*aas only those >> oslo-incubator modules that are used there solely (=not used in >> main repo). > > How are the *aas packages installed? Are they separate libraries or > applications that are installed on top of neutron? Or are their > files copied into the neutron namespace?
They are separate libraries with their own setup.py, dependencies, tarballs, all that, but they are free to use (public) code from main neutron package. > >> >> I think requirements are a bit easier and should track all >> direct dependencies in each of the repos, so that in case main >> repo decides to drop one, neutron-*aas repos are not broken. >> >> For requirements, it's different because there is no major burden >> due to duplicate entries in repos. >> >>> >>> On Dec 15, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Doug Wiegley >>> <do...@a10networks.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Ihar and I discussed this on IRC, and are going forward with >>>> option 2 unless someone has a big problem with it. >>>> >>>> Thanks, Doug >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/15/14, 8:22 AM, "Doug Wiegley" <do...@a10networks.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Ihar, >>>>> >>>>> I’m actually in favor of option 2, but it implies a few >>>>> things about your time, and I wanted to chat with you >>>>> before presuming. >>>>> >>>>> Maintenance can not involve breaking changes. At this >>>>> point, the co-gate will block it. Also, oslo graduation >>>>> changes will have to be made in the services repos first, >>>>> and then Neutron. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, doug >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 12/15/14, 6:15 AM, "Ihar Hrachyshka" >>>>> <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> the question arose recently in one of reviews for neutron-*aas >>> repos to remove all oslo-incubator code from those repos since >>> it's duplicated in neutron main repo. (You can find the link to >>> the review at the end of the email.) >>> >>> Brief hostory: neutron repo was recently split into 4 pieces >>> (main, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, and neutron-vpnaas). The >>> split resulted in each repository keeping their own copy of >>> neutron/openstack/common/... tree (currently unused in all >>> neutron-*aas repos that are still bound to modules from main >>> repo). >>> >>> As a oslo liaison for the project, I wonder what's the best way >>> to manage oslo-incubator files. We have several options: >>> >>> 1. just kill all the neutron/openstack/common/ trees from >>> neutron-*aas repositories and continue using modules from main >>> repo. >>> >>> 2. kill all duplicate modules from neutron-*aas repos and >>> leave only those that are used in those repos but not in main >>> repo. >>> >>> 3. fully duplicate all those modules in each of four repos that >>> use them. >>> >>> I think option 1. is a straw man, since we should be able to >>> introduce new oslo-incubator modules into neutron-*aas repos >>> even if they are not used in main repo. >>> >>> Option 2. is good when it comes to synching non-breaking bug >>> fixes (or security fixes) from oslo-incubator, in that it will >>> require only one sync patch instead of e.g. four. At the same >>> time there may be potential issues when synchronizing updates >>> from oslo-incubator that would break API and hence require >>> changes to each of the modules that use it. Since we don't >>> support atomic merges for multiple projects in gate, we will >>> need to be cautious about those updates, and we will still need >>> to leave neutron-*aas repos broken for some time (though the >>> time may be mitigated with care). >>> >>> Option 3. is vice versa - in theory, you get total decoupling, >>> meaning no oslo-incubator updates in main repo are expected to >>> break neutron-*aas repos, but bug fixing becomes a huge PITA. >>> >>> I would vote for option 2., for two reasons: - most >>> oslo-incubator syncs are non-breaking, and we may effectively >>> apply care to updates that may result in potential breakage >>> (f.e. being able to trigger an integrated run for each of >>> neutron-*aas repos with the main sync patch, if there are any >>> concerns). - it will make oslo liaison life a lot easier. OK, >>> I'm probably too selfish on that. ;) - it will make stable >>> maintainers life a lot easier. The main reason why stable >>> maintainers and distributions like recent oslo graduation >>> movement is that we don't need to track each bug fix we need in >>> every project, and waste lots of cycles on it. Being able to >>> fix a bug in one place only is *highly* anticipated. [OK, I'm >>> quite selfish on that one too.] - it's a delusion that there >>> will be no neutron-main syncs that will break neutron-*aas >>> repos ever. There can still be problems due to incompatibility >>> between neutron main and neutron-*aas code resulted EXACTLY >>> because multiple parts of the same process use different >>> versions of the same module. >>> >>> That said, Doug Wiegley (lbaas core) seems to be in favour of >>> option 3. due to lower coupling that is achieved in that way. >>> I know that lbaas team had a bad experience due to tight >>> coupling to neutron project in the past, so I appreciate their >>> concerns. >>> >>> All in all, we should come up with some standard solution for >>> both advanced services that are already split out, *and* >>> upcoming vendor plugin shrinking initiative. >>> >>> The initial discussion is captured at: >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141427/ >>> >>> Thanks, /Ihar >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUkCU/AAoJEC5aWaUY1u57XPgH/jNEpZCqWP0R3CluOLuUHhWp yzJNSN8hscdfi3+cn65VDhH6iy2lnOsg8SAr/SZ8jk3JRa/ic7QhKQqXatTdcq58 iAmKBij+slngLhTcv0GJtbLPUdUyiKPnE0+TA88P7ijgMrj6OoF3PCzFpYHGv/ra z0clRdwv9CSnG1S/+wAZlexawt6qnm/M2da6wgHUrVmoNLMsimxtWGN8r9TZISaZ mf43DMh4+XDt2rFgZ3Pb3tvgyzUshA5rWykQJ6PBXhyQgaNojVrvBsfQpiP1PuTK BzidEL9jNNoi6BVq3DkMAnVIPHX1bYhO928svWgUCVLEhr9DFnKI2sNIhyPaWqY= =mt2Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
