[openstack-dev] [Neutron] A big tent home for Neutron backend code
mestery at mestery.com
Tue Apr 28 19:20:01 UTC 2015
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/22/2015 02:19 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> > a) Adopt these as repositories under the Neutron project team.
> > In this case, I would see them operating with their own review teams as
> > they do today to avoid imposing additional load on the neutron-core or
> > neutron-specs-core teams. However, by being a part of the Neutron team,
> > the backend team would submit to oversight by the Neutron PTL.
> > There are some other details to work out to ensure expectations are
> > clearly set for everyone involved. If this is the path that makes
> > sense, we can work through those as a next step.
> Based on the feedback on this thread so far, this seems like the best
> choice. I said I'd come back with some more proposed details, so here
> we are. Let me know what seems off or missing here.
> 1) Process
> The process for proposing the move of a repo into openstack/ and under
> the Neutron project is to propose a patch to the openstack/governance
> repository. For example, if I were proposing moving networking-ovn, I
> would add the following entry under Neutron in reference/projects.yaml:
> - repo: openstack/networking-ovn
> - name: release:independent
> For more information about the release:independent tag (and other
> currently defined tags) see:
> The Neutron PTL must approve the change. The TC clarified that once a
> project has been approved (Neutron in this case), the project can add
> additional repos without needing TC approval as long as the added
> repositories are within the existing approved scope of the project.
> 2) Responsibilities
> All affected repositories already have their own review teams. The
> sub-team working on the sub-project is entirely responsible for
> day-to-day development. That includes reviews, bug tracking, and
> working on testing.
> By being included, the project accepts oversight by the TC as a part of
> being in OpenStack, and also accepts oversight by the Neutron PTL.
> 3) Criteria
> As mentioned before, the Neutron PTL must approve the inclusion of each
> additional repository under the Neutron project. I suggest that the
> primary criteria used should be the same as what the TC uses for new
> OpenStack projects, at least where it makes sense:
> One detail that I expect might be controversial is around maturity. I
> think it's important that we recognize and embrace that from the very
> beginning of many projects, they are indeed "one of us", even if it's
> early in the development process. We should *not* be using that as
> entry criteria into what's considered OpenStack.
> Instead, we should be looking to define project metadata to help people
> understand what things are, including their features, limitations, and
> maturity level. The tags system being used by the TC is intended to
> address this at an OpenStack-wide level. Some additional work could be
> done specific to Neutron, just with a page that lists backends and
> information about them.
> Any project that fails to meet the criteria later can be dropped at any
> time. For example, if some repo is clearly unmaintained, it can be
I'm +1 for all of this. Thanks for driving this Russell!
> Russell Bryant
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev