Le 31/03/2015 02:57, Dugger, Donald D a écrit :
I actually prefer to use the term Gantt, it neatly encapsulates the discussions
and it doesn't take much effort to realize that Gantt refers to the scheduler
and, if you feel there is confusion, we can clarify things in the wiki page to
emphasize the process: clean up the current scheduler interfaces and then split
off the scheduler. The end goal will be the Gantt scheduler and I'd prefer not
to change the discussion.
Bottom line is I don't see a need to drop the Gantt reference.
While I agree with you that *most* of the scheduler effort is to
spin-off the scheduler as a dedicated repository whose codename is
Gantt, there are some notes to do :
1. not all the efforts are related to the split, some are only
reducing the tech debt within Nova (eg.
bp/detach-service-from-computenode has very little impact on the
scheduler itself, but rather on what is passed to the scheduler as
resources) and may confuse people who could wonder why it is related to
the split
2. We haven't yet agreed on a migration path for Gantt and what will
become the existing nova-scheduler. I seriously doubt that the Nova
community would accept to keep the existing nova-scheduler as a feature
duplicate to the future Gantt codebase, but that has been not yet
discussed and things can be less clear
3. Based on my experience, we are loosing contributors or people
interested in the scheduler area because they just don't know that Gantt
is actually at the moment the Nova scheduler.
I seriously don't think that if we decide to leave the Gantt codename
unused while we're working on Nova, it won't seriously impact our
capacity to propose an alternative based on a separate repository,
ideally as a cross-project service. It will just translate the reality,
ie. that Gantt is at the moment more an idea than a project.
-Sylvain
--
Don Dugger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
Ph: 303/443-3786
-----Original Message-----
From: Sylvain Bauza [mailto:sba...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 8:17 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] [scheduler] [gantt] Please stop using "Gantt"
for discussing about Nova scheduler
Hi,
tl;dr: I used the [gantt] tag for this e-mail, but I would prefer if we could
do this for the last time until we spin-off the project.
As it is confusing for many people to understand the difference in between
the future Gantt project and the Nova scheduler effort we're doing, I'm
proposing to stop using that name for all the efforts related to reducing the
technical debt and splitting out the scheduler. That includes, not
exhaustively, the topic name for our IRC weekly meetings on Tuesdays, any ML
thread related to the Nova scheduler or any discussed related to the scheduler
happening on IRC.
Instead of using [gantt], please use [nova] [scheduler] tags.
That said, any discussion related to the real future of a cross-project scheduler based
on the existing Nova scheduler makes sense to be tagged as "Gantt", of course.
-Sylvain
__________________________________________________________________________
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 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 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
