[openstack-dev] [tc] [all] OpenStack moving both too fast and too slow at the same time

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Fri May 5 19:57:27 UTC 2017

On 05/05/2017 10:09 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 05/05/2017 06:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 05/04/2017 11:08 AM, Alex Schultz wrote:
>>> Probably because they are still on Kilo. Not sure how much they could
>>> be contributing to the current when their customers are demanding that
>>> something is rock solid which by now looks nothing like the current
>>> upstream.   I think this is part of the problem as the upstream can
>>> tend to outpace anyone else in terms of features or anything else.  I
>>> think the the bigger question could be what's the benefit of
>>> continuing to press forward and add yet more features when consumers
>>> cannot keep up to consume these?  Personally I think usability (and
>>> some stability) sometimes tends to take a backseat to features in the
>>> upstream which is unfortunate because it makes these problems worse.
>> The general statement of "people care more about features than
>> usability/stability" gets thrown around a lot. And gets lots of head
>> nodding. But rarely comes with specifics.
>> Can we be specific about what feature work is outpacing the consumers
>> that don't help with usability/stability?
> On the usability/stability front, in nova you still can't correctly
> live-migrate if you have dedicated CPUs or hugepages, or a specific NUMA
> topology.  The commits for this have been under review since Kilo, but
> never quite make it in.  At the same time, there are no warnings or
> errors to the user saying that it's not stable...it just migrates and
> hopes that it doesn't collide with another instance.
> On the usability front, the new "openstack" client doesn't support
> microversions, which limits its usefulness with nova.  (I think some
> folks are starting to look at this one.)

Those are things that have not yet been done. Which there are lots.
Would love for more of it to be done.

But neither is actually an answer to what features that have no impact
on usability/stability, are getting prioritized.

I'm sorry about being pedantic here, but I really want anyone claiming
that features without stability/usability improvements are trumping that
work to identify the features in that category. (not just complain about
things they wish also fit into the 5lb bag).


Sean Dague

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list