[openstack-dev] [Nova] Criteria for compute drivers
john at johngarbutt.com
Thu Jul 11 21:50:35 UTC 2013
This seems a fair way of doing it.
Gives users and developers a fair warning.
If its not tested, because we will keep breaking it by accident, and
thats not fair on anyone, so those drivers shouldn't be in the main
I wonder if we should requiring a certain level of testing or unit testing?
Like % coverage, or start VM, attach volume, delete VM?
Either way, this seems a good step forward.
On 10 July 2013 15:33, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 08:05 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 7:38 PM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com
>> <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> Nova includes various compute drivers today, but the test coverage they
>> receive varies quite a bit. This is documented on the following wiki
>> page. The drivers are broken up into groups A, B, and C.
>> We have two new compute drivers in the queue for Havana: docker  and
>> z/vm . I'd like to propose as a piece of criteria for inclusion that
>> new drivers go into groups A or B.
>> Further, I would like to see *all* drivers move into groups A or B by
>> the release of Icehouse. I've been told that this is already in the
>> works for VMware and baremetal, at least.
>> And if a driver doesn't go into group A or B by Icehouse? Do we put
>> clear warnings in the release notes that they are 'use at your own
>> risk.' Perhaps if drivers stay in C by the end of Icehouse Development
>> we remove them, as we have no way of guaranteeing they work and shipping
>> broken code looks bad.
> Yes, removing them is what I had in mind.
> Russell Bryant
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
More information about the OpenStack-dev