Open Stack

On 24 January 2014 22:26, Clint Byrum <clint at fewbar.com> wrote:

>> This enourmous amount of repositories adds too much infrustructural
>> complexity, and maintaining the changes in in consistent and reliable
>> manner becomes a really tricky tasks. We often have changes which require
>> modifing two or more repositories - and thus we have to make several
>> changesets in gerrit, targeting different repositories. Quite often the

As does adding any feature with e.g. networking - change neutron,
neutronclient and nova, or block storage, change cinder, cinderclient
and nova... This isn't complexity - it's not the connecting together
of different things in inappropriate ways - its really purity, you're
having to treat each thing as a stable library API.

>> dependencies between these changesets are not obvious, the patches get
>> reviewed and approved on wrong order (yes, this also questions the quality
>> of the code review, but that is a different topic), which causes in
>> inconsostent state of the repositories.

Actually it says your tests are insufficient, otherwise things
wouldn't be able to land :).

> So, as somebody who does not run Murano, but who does care a lot about
> continuous delivery, I actually think keeping them separate is a great
> way to make sure you have ongoing API stability.

+1 bet me to that by just minutes:)

> Since all of those pieces can run on different machines, having the APIs
> able to handle both "the old way" and "the new way" is quite helpful in
> a large scale roll out where you want to keep things running while you
> update.
>
> Anyway, that may not matter much, but it is one way to think about it.

Indeed :)

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud