> and really lowering barriers for people who just begin create plugins.
Nonsense. First, people usually create them via running `fpb --create plugin-name` that generates plugin boilerplate. And that boilerplate won't contain that changes. Second, if people ain't smart enough to change few lines in `metadata.yaml` of generated boilerplate to make it work with latest Fuel, maybe it's better for them to do not develop plugins at all? On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Stanislaw Bogatkin <sbogat...@mirantis.com> wrote: > +1 to maintain example plugins. It is easy enough and really lowering > barriers for people who just begin create plugins. > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <mmoses...@mirantis.com> > wrote: >> >> Igor, >> >> It seems you are proposing an IKEA approach to plugins. Take Fuel's >> example plugin, add in the current Fuel release, and then build it. We >> maintained these plugins in the past, but now it should a manual step >> to test it out on the current release. >> >> What would be a more ideal situation that meets the needs of users and >> QA? Right now we have failed tests until we can decide on a solution >> that works for everybody. >> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com> >> wrote: >> > No, this is a wrong road to go. >> > >> > What if in Fuel 10 we drop v1 plugins support? What should we do? >> > Remove v1 example from source tree? That doesn't seem good to me. >> > >> > Example plugins are only examples. The list of supported releases must >> > be maintained on system test side, and system tests must inject that >> > information into plugin's metadata.yaml and test it. >> > >> > Again, I don't say we shouldn't test plugins. I say, tests should be >> > responsible for preparing plugins. I can say even more: tests should >> > not rely on what is produced by plugins, since it's something that >> > could be changed and tests start failing. >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Swann Croiset <scroi...@mirantis.com> >> > wrote: >> >> 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 >> >> >> > >> > >> > __________________________________________________________________________ >> > 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 > > > > > -- > with best regards, > Stan. > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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
