On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 24 November 2015 at 21:46, Akihiro Motoki <amot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Neutron has now various subprojects and some of them would like to >> implement Horizon supports. Most of them are additional features. >> I would like to start the discussion where we should have horizon support. >> >> [Background] >> Horizon team introduced a plugin mechanism and we can add horizon panels >> from external repositories. Horizon team is recommending external repos >> for >> additional services for faster iteration and features. >> We have various horizon related repositories now [1]. >> >> In Neutron related world, we have neutron-lbaas-dashboard and >> horizon-cisco-ui repos. >> >> [Possible options] >> There are several possible options for neutron sub-projects. >> My current vote is (b), and the next is (a). It looks a good balance to >> me. >> I would like to gather broader opinions, >> >> (a) horizon in-tree repo >> - [+] It was a legacy approach and there is no initial effort to setup a >> repo. >> - [+] Easy to share code conventions. >> - [-] it does not scale. Horizon team can be a bottleneck. >> >> (b) a single dashboard repo for all neutron sub-projects >> - [+] No need to set up a repo by each sub-project >> - [+] Easier to share the code convention. Can get horizon reviewers. >> - [-] who will be a core reviewer of this repo? >> >> (c) neutron sub-project repo >> > > All circumstances considered, I think c) is the only viable one. > > +1 > - [+] Each sub-project can develop a dashboard fast. >> - [-] It is doable, but the directory tree can be complicated. >> > > why? do you envision something else other than /horizon directory in the > tree? > > >> - [-] Lead to too many repos and the horizon team/liaison cannot cover >> all. >> > > If that's true for horizon, shouldn't the same be true for the neutron > team :)? IMO, the level of feedback/oversight provided is always going to > be constant (you can't clone people) no matter how the efforts are > distributed. I'd rather empower the individual projects. > > +1000 Option C seems like the way forward here. > >> (d) a separate repo per neutron sub-project >> Similar to (c) >> - [+] A dedicate repo for dashboard simplifies the directory tree. >> - [-] Need to setup a separate repo. >> - [-] Lead to too many repos and the horizon team/liaison cannot cover >> all. >> > >> Note that this mail is not intended to move the current neutron >> support in horizon >> to outside of horizon tree. I would like to discuss Horizon support of >> additional features. >> >> Akihiro >> >> [1] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/horizon/plugins.html >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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
