Hi guys! > * Do not merge a patch without at least one review from both groups > * Collaborate to make the module compliant I'm strongly agree with it, because it'll help to avoid some mistakes. Also, someone from puppet-manager-core may to prompt what are we doing wrong or better way for elaboration of murano module.
Thanks! 2015-06-17 18:49 GMT+03:00 Serg Melikyan <smelik...@mirantis.com>: > Emilien, > > Thank you for your proposal, I completely agree with it: > > > * Move the module under the big tent > Proposed change in infra [1] and corresponding change in governance [2] > > > * Adding Puppet OpenStack group part of core permissions > I've added puppet-manager-core to puppet-murano-core > > > * Keep Puppet Murano folks part of core permissions for now > I've added Denis Egorenko to puppet-murano-core (group was empty > previously). > > > * Do not merge a patch without at least one review from both groups > > * Collaborate to make the module compliant > Denis will be responsible for initial review from Murano side in order > to not overburden OpenStack Puppet with helping with Puppet basics. We > will make sure to not merge anything without +2 from someone from > puppet-manager-core. We will start with basic repository structure and > will move existing module bit by bit. > > > * When the module is compliant, we only keep Puppet OpenStack > > group managing the module, like it's done for other modules. > Sure! > > Once again thank you for your help and concerns! > > References: > [1] https://review.openstack.org/192730 > [2] https://review.openstack.org/192727 > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > > On 06/17/2015 09:50 AM, Serg Melikyan wrote: > >> Thank you for sharing link to list of things that new module should > >> satisfy to! It will be really helpful even if list will change over > >> time. At least we have pointers how to start making our module > >> compliant. > >> > >> Regarding figuring out permissions - I don't mind if we will set > >> puppet-core as group responsible for the repository, I believe that > >> through contributing Murano module authors will get enough > >> creditability to be included to the puppet-core. This will help to > >> ensure that module is developed according all rules of Puppet > >> OpenStack Community and nothing will be merged that does not satisfy > >> adopted way of doing things. Emilien, if you agree with this approach > >> I will send appropriate change to review. > >> > > > > I like Monty's proposal. > > > > I propose: > > * Move the module under the big tent > > * Adding Puppet OpenStack group part of core permissions > > * Keep Puppet Murano folks part of core permissions for now > > * Do not merge a patch without at least one review from both groups > > * Collaborate to make the module compliant > > * When the module is compliant, we only keep Puppet OpenStack group > > managing the module, like it's done for other modules. > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> > wrote: > >> On 06/17/2015 08:53 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > >>>>> Hi Serg, > >>>>> > >>>>> On 06/17/2015 05:35 AM, Serg Melikyan wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Emilien, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would like to answer your question regarding > >>>>>> stackforge/puppet-murano repository asked in different thread: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Someone from Fuel team created first the module in Fuel, 6 > >>>>>>> months ago [1] and 3 months later someone from Fuel team > >>>>>>> created an empty repository in Stackforge [2]. By the way, > >>>>>>> Puppet OpenStack community does not have core permissions on > >>>>>>> this module and it's own by Murano team. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Murano was included to Fuel around 2 years ago, our first > >>>>>> official release as part of Fuel was Icehouse - yes, we have > >>>>>> puppet module for Murano for a long time now. But until recently > >>>>>> we didn't had a Big Tent in place and that is why we never > >>>>>> thought that we able to upstream our module. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Once policy regarding upstream puppet modules in Fuel changed and > >>>>>> Big Tent model was adopted we decided to upstream module for > >>>>>> Murano. I am really sorry that I didn't contact you for more > >>>>>> information how to do that properly and just created > >>>>>> corresponding repository. > >>>>> > >>>>> Well, in fact, I'm sorry for you; you could not benefit of Puppet > >>>>> OpenStack community. Let's fix that. > >>>>> > >>>>>> I didn't give permission to Puppet OpenStack community for this > >>>>>> repository because it would be strange, given I didn't even > >>>>>> contact you. We thought that we would upstream what we have now > >>>>>> and then make sure that this repo will be integrated with Puppet > >>>>>> OpenStack ecosystem. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We still have big desire to upstream our puppet module. Fuel is > >>>>>> not only user of this module, there are other projects who would > >>>>>> like to use Murano as part of they solution and use puppet module > >>>>>> from Fuel for deployment. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Can you advise how we should proceed further? > >>>>> > >>>>> The more recent patch to add a module in OpenStack is zaqar: > >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/191942/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Two things we need to solve is the fact if you move your module to > >>>>> the big tent: * bring the module compliant (I'm working on a > >>>>> blueprint to explain what is that, but you can already read what we > >>>>> said at the Summit: > >>>>> > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-summit-design-puppet-compliant > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> * figure out Gerrit permissions. If the module is official, it has to be > >>>>> maintained by Puppet OpenStack group, but that would mean you won't > >>>>> be core on it, which is weird to me at this stage. We are facing > >>>>> the same situation with puppet-monasca, (except the module lives in > >>>>> Stackforge for day1). > >>>>> > >> > >> When we suck sub-projects into infra, we often make the person or team > >> who was maintainer on it before it came into infra core on just that - > >> with the infra-core team on it as well. For instance: > >> > >> puppet-murano-core: > >> serg melikyan > >> puppet-core > >> > >> Or something. Not saying it's the right choice- just that it's the > >> pattern we've followed before over in our neck of the woods. > >> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> References: [1] > >>>>>> > https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-library/tree/master/deployment/puppet/murano/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> [2] https://review.openstack.org/155688 > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for taking care of that! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > __________________________________________________________________________ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Emilien Macchi > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > Serg Melikyan, Senior Software Engineer at Mirantis, Inc. > http://mirantis.com | smelik...@mirantis.com > -- Best Regards, Egorenko Denis, Deployment Engineer Mirantis
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
