Hi, Any progress on reduce the fragmentation ?
Kind Regards Emrah ASLAN Cisco/Citrix System Engineer Değerli İş Ortaklarımız, Logicom kampanyaları , fırsat, duyuru ve stok bilgilerinin sizlere düzenli ulaşması için aşağıdaki linki tıklayarak e-mail adresinizi güncellemenizi rica ediyoruz. http://visitor.r20.constantcontact.com/manage/optin?v=001t9egDEMH10MEulnTu-Lzln0RXbiYIgR2HnLd_hpHmPb0K44ZxJOya0FvCOF3TI8c2qeErt1Xrn3PlZqntTSqiSTW40PTK2XQ8OlOUe4qYOE%3D -----Original Message----- From: Derek Higgins [mailto:der...@redhat.com] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 12:35 PM To: Jay Pipes; openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Operations project: Packaging On 27/11/14 15:06, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 11/24/2014 06:58 AM, Derek Higgins wrote: >> On 18/11/14 06:16, Michael Chapman wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Packaging was one of the biggest points of interest in the Friday >>> Paris meeting, and I'd like to use this thread to have a centralised >>> discussion and/or argument regarding whether there is a packaging >>> system that is flexible enough that we can adopt it as a community >>> and reduce the fragmentation. This conversation began in Paris, but >>> will likely continue for some time. >>> >>> The Friday session indicates that as operators we have common >>> requirements: >>> >>> A system that takes the sources from upstream projects and produces >>> artifacts (packages or images). >>> >>> There are numerous projects that have attempted to solve this problem. >>> Some are on stackforge, some live outside. If you are an author or a >>> user of one of these systems, please give your opinion. >> >> To throw another project into the mix, I've been working on building >> master packages with delorean[1] for a last few months(currently >> building for fedora but planning on adding more), the specs being >> uses are based off the RDO packaging. >> >> The plan we're slowly working towards will be to allow this packaging >> hopefully become the upstream of the RDO packaging for the released >> projects. We're also hoping to allow contributions from the whole RDO >> community via gerrithub [2]. >> >> If anybody is interested the packaging we are maintaining is on >> github[3], with a yum repository being created for every commit into >> the monitored openstack projects[4] >> >> So ya count me in for any discussions happening. >> >> [1] https://github.com/openstack-packages/delorean >> [2] https://review.gerrithub.io/ >> [3] https://github.com/openstack-packages >> [4] http://209.132.178.33/repos/report.html (DNS pending) > > Any reason stackforge wasn't chosen instead of another Github organization? While trying to figure out the process having it on a github org was an advantage for a number of reasons for example we started out with a small set of packaging repositories and added as needed, creating these is a lot quicker on github, adding stackforge repositories would have been slower, we've also renamed a couple of repositories and deleted others In future as things settle down and we get a better view of whats needed, I'm open to moving to stackforge. > > Best, > -jay > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operator > s _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
