[openstack-dev] [puppet] [fuel] more collaboration request
emilien at redhat.com
Fri Jun 12 20:09:00 UTC 2015
On 06/12/2015 03:33 PM, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:25:31PM +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>>> I have already explained in the thread how we address the problem of
>>> tracking down and managing the Fuel specific changes in forked modules.
>>> With that problem addressed, I don't see any other objective reason for
>>> frustration. Does anybody's bonus depend on the number of lines of code
>>> in stackforge repositories such as fuel-library that git blame
>>> attributes to their name?
>> I don't think anyone here is talking about bonuses or worrying about
>> salaries. The fact that you mention it offends the purposes of this
>> thread and, as much as you don't care, I'm really sad to read that.
>> The whole thing this thread is trying to achieve is improving
>> collaboration and you are derailing the conversation with completely
>> unfriendly/unhelpful comments like the one above.
> I am really sorry that I made you feel bad about what I wrote, I didn't
> mean to do that. I actually completely agree with you that this aspect
> of the thread was derailing the conversation, and I tried to use
> reductio ad absurdum to demonstrate how ridiculous it can get if we
> focus on perfecting author attribution instead of discussing
> collaboration. I should have been more explicit in indicating that I
> didn't actually mean this as a serious question. Lets write it off as a
> bad joke that didn't make it across the language barrier.
>> It does cause frustration because, as you can read from Emiliem's
>> original email, it not just adds some extra burden to people in the
>> puppet team but it also defeates the purposes of the team itself,
>> which is creating OpenStack puppet manifests that are consumable by
> Now I see that we're on the same page. I agree that it does add extra
> burden, and even though we've done what we could to reduce that burden
> in the process I've described earlier, the only way to eliminate it
> completely is to use upstream Puppet modules in Fuel directly and
> without Fuel specific modifications. I see a broad consensus on this
> thread in favor of setting this as the end goal, and I gladly join that
> To prove that I'm not merely trying to placate you, here's what I had to
> say about this to the Fuel team back in March 2014 when we first came up
> with our current process for tracking upsteam:
It seems we finally broke the ice and found some agreements here, I'm
Thanks for your help and your involvement in this topic, it's really
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the OpenStack-dev