On 18 December 2015 at 16:58, Mike Bayer <mba...@redhat.com> wrote: > >
>> Or do you still consider SQLA / Alembic as just a 3rd party lib for >> OpenStack? Wouldn't it be nice to have it maintained directly in >> OpenStack infra? Your thoughts? > > Alembic / SQLAlchemy are completely outside of Openstack and are > intrinsic to thousands of non-Openstack environments and userbases. I > wonder why don't we ask the same question of other Openstack > dependencies, like numpy, lxml, boto, requests, rabbitMQ, and everything > else. Whats happening organically is that many contributing orgs also contribute to projects like libvirt, sqlaclhemy and so on - so there's some 'common funding source' pattern happening - but IMO its entirely appropriate to consider these projects as independent. Because.. they are :). > As far as it being *gated*, that is already the plan within Openstack > itself via the upper-constraints system discussed in this thread, which > I mistakenly thought was already in use across the board. That is, new > release of library X hits pypi, some series of CI only involved with > testing new releases of libs above that of upper-constraints runs tests > on it to see if it breaks current openstack applications, and if so, the > constraints file stays unchanged and the bulk of gate jobs remain > unaffected. Yah, we're rolling that out more broadly at the moment. cookiecutter has been updated, there's a review setting -constraints as the expected pattern in the infra manual now. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hpe.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ 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
