IMHO it is important to keep plugin examples and keep testing them, very valuable for plugin developers.
For example, I've encountered [0] the case where "plugin as role" feature wasn't easily testable with fuel-qa because not compliant with the last plugin data structure, and more recently we've spotted a regression [1] with "vip-reservation" feature introduced by a change in nailgun. These kind of issues are time consuming for plugin developers and can/must be avoided by testing them. I don't even understand why the question is raised while fuel plugins are supposed to be supported and more and more used [3], even by murano [4] ... [0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1543962 [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1551320 [3] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/085636.html [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286310/ On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <mmoses...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi Fuelers, > > I would like to bring your attention a dilemma we have here. It seems > that there is a dispute as to whether we should maintain the releases > list for example plugins[0]. In this case, this is for adding version > 9.0 to the list. > > Right now, we run a swarm test that tries to install the example > plugin and do a deployment, but it's failing only for this reason. I > should add that this is the only automated daily test that will verify > that our plugin framework actually works. During the Mitaka > development cycle, we already had an extended period where plugins > were broken[1]. Removing this test (or leaving it permanently red, > which is effectively the same), would raise the risk to any member of > the Fuel community who depends on plugins actually working. > > The other impact of abandoning maintenance of example plugins is that > it means that a given interested Fuel Plugin developer would not be > able to easily get started with plugin development. It might not be > inherently obvious to add the current Fuel release to the > metadata.yaml file and it would likely discourage such a user. In this > case, I would propose that we remove example plugins from fuel-plugins > GIT repo if they are not maintained. Non-functioning code is worse > than deleted code in my opinion. > > Please share your opinions and let's decide which way to go with this > bug[2] > > [0] https://github.com/openstack/fuel-plugins/tree/master/examples > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1544505 > [2] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1548340 > > Best Regards, > Matthew Mosesohn > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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
