[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Time to decide something on the vendor tools repo
trown at redhat.com
Thu Jun 4 14:21:20 UTC 2015
On 06/04/2015 09:29 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> Hi again!
> ~ half an hour has passed since my last email, and now I have one more
> question to discuss and decide!
At this rate, we could match the [all] tag today.
> On the summit we were discussing things like chassis discovery, and
> arrived at rough conclusion that we want it to be somewhere in a
> separate repo. More precisely, we wanted some place for vendor to
> contribute code (aka scripts) that aren't good fit for both standard
> interfaces and existing vendor passthrough (chassis discovery again is a
> good example).
> I suggest to decide something finally to unblock people. A few questions
> Should we
> 1. create one repo for all vendors (say, ironic-contrib-tools)
As this is for vendor-specific stuff, I think there is a good chance
that there will not be a lot of cross-vendor reviews.
> 2. create a repo for every vendor appearing
> 3. ask vendors to go for stackforge, at least until their solution
> shapes (like we did with inspector)?
It seems like 2 and 3 are the same except for ownership and location of
the repos. I think it makes more sense for vendors to own their own
repos on stackforge at least until there is enough interest outside of
that vendor to get good external reviews.
> 4. %(your_variant)s
> If we go down 1-2 route, should
> 1. ironic-core team own the new repo(s)?
> 2. or should we form a new team from interested people?
> (1 and 2 and not exclusive actually).
> I personally would go for #3 - stackforge. We already have e.g.
> stackforge/proliantutils as an example of something closely related to
> Ironic, but still independent.
> I'm also fine with #1#1 (one repo, owned by group of interested people).
> What do you think?
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev