<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Mike Perez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:thingee@gmail.com" target="_blank">thingee@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">There are a couple of cases [1][2] I'm seeing where new Cinder volume<br>
drivers for Liberty are rebranding other volume drivers. This involves<br>
inheriting off another volume driver's class(es) and providing some<br>
config options to set the backend name, etc.<br>
<br>
Two problems:<br>
<br>
1) There is a thought of no CI [3] is needed, since you're using<br>
another vendor's driver code which does have a CI.<br>
<br>
2) IMO another way of satisfying a check mark of being OpenStack<br>
supported and disappearing from the community.<br>
<br>
What gain does OpenStack get from these kind of drivers?<br>
<br>
Discuss.<br>
<br>
[1] - <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187853/" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187853/</a><br>
[2] - <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187707/4" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187707/4</a><br>
[3] - <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers</a><br>
<br>
--<br>
Mike Perez<br>
<br>
__________________________________________________________________________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">This case is interesting mostly because it's the same contractor submitting the driver for all the related platforms. Frankly I find the whole rebranding annoying, but there's certainly nothing really wrong with it, and well... why not, it's Open Source.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">What I do find annoying is the lack of give back; so this particular contributor has submitted a few drivers thus far (SCST, DotHill and some others IIRC), and now has three more proposed. This would be great except I personally have spent a very significant amount of time with this person helping with development, CI and understanding OpenStack and Cinder.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">To date, I don't see that he's provided a single code review (good or bad) or contributed anything back other than to his specific venture.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">Anyway... I think your point was for input on the two questions:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">For item '1':</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small">I guess as silly as it seems they should probably have 3'rd party CI. There are firmware differences etc that may actually change behaviors, or things my diverge, or maybe their code is screwed up and the inheritance doesn't work (doubtful).</span><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="monospace, monospace" size="2">Yes, it's just a business venture in this case (good or bad, not for me to decide). The fact is we don't discriminate or place a value on peoples contributions, and this shouldn't be any different. I think the best answer is "follow same process for any driver" and move on. This does point out that maybe OpenStack/Cinder has grown to a point where there are so many options and choices that it's time to think about changing some of the policies and ways we do things.</font></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small">In my opinion, OpenStack doesn't gain much in this particular case, which brings me back to; </span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small">remove all drivers except the ref-impl and have them pip installable and on a certified list based on CI.</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small">Thanks,</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><span style="font-size:small">John</span></div><br></div></div>