<html><body><p><a href="https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/optional-requirements-packages"><font size="2">https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/optional-requirements-packages</font></a><font size="2"> is the one I created </font><br><font size="2">I agree with you tend to think it's a specless blueprint unless someone want a spec on it </font><br><br><font size="2">And I saw there are a set of more discussions in the ML so again agree that let's watch and see what's really need to be changed then update blueprint</font><br><br><font size="2">Thanks for your info and support</font><br><br><font size="2">Best Regards! <br><br>Kevin (Chen) Ji 纪 晨<br><br>Engineer, zVM Development, CSTL<br>Notes: Chen CH Ji/China/IBM@IBMCN Internet: jichenjc@cn.ibm.com<br>Phone: +86-10-82451493<br>Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian District, Beijing 100193, PRC </font><br><br><img width="16" height="16" src="cid:1__=8FBB08FDDFA49F1C8f9e8a93df938690918c8FB@" border="0" alt="Inactive hide details for Eric Fried ---04/12/2018 08:43:27 PM---+1 This sounds reasonable to me. I'm glad the issue was raise"><font size="2" color="#424282">Eric Fried ---04/12/2018 08:43:27 PM---+1 This sounds reasonable to me. I'm glad the issue was raised, but IMO it</font><br><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">From: </font><font size="2">Eric Fried <openstack@fried.cc></font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">To: </font><font size="2">"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org></font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">Date: </font><font size="2">04/12/2018 08:43 PM</font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">Subject: </font><font size="2">Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Deployers] Optional, platform specific, dependancies in requirements.txt</font><br><hr width="100%" size="2" align="left" noshade style="color:#8091A5; "><br><br><br><tt><font size="2">+1<br><br>This sounds reasonable to me. I'm glad the issue was raised, but IMO it<br>shouldn't derail progress on an approved blueprint with ready code.<br><br>Jichen, would you please go ahead and file that blueprint template (no<br>need to write a spec yet) and link it in a review comment on the bottom<br>zvm patch so we have a paper trail? I'm thinking something like<br>"Consistent platform-specific and optional requirements" -- that leaves<br>us open to decide *how* we're going to "handle" them.<br><br>Thanks,<br>efried<br><br>On 04/12/2018 04:13 AM, Chen CH Ji wrote:<br>> Thanks for Michael for raising this question and detailed information<br>> from Clark<br>> <br>> As indicated in the mail, xen, vmware etc might already have this kind<br>> of requirements (and I guess might be more than that) ,<br>> can we accept z/VM requirements first by following other existing ones<br>> then next I can create a BP later to indicate this kind<br>> of change request by referring to Clark's comments and submit patches to<br>> handle it ? Thanks<br>> <br>> Best Regards!<br>> <br>> Kevin (Chen) Ji 纪 晨<br>> <br>> Engineer, zVM Development, CSTL<br>> Notes: Chen CH Ji/China/IBM@IBMCN Internet: jichenjc@cn.ibm.com<br>> Phone: +86-10-82451493<br>> Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian<br>> District, Beijing 100193, PRC<br>> <br>> Inactive hide details for Matt Riedemann ---04/12/2018 08:46:25 AM---On<br>> 4/11/2018 5:09 PM, Michael Still wrote: >Matt Riedemann ---04/12/2018<br>> 08:46:25 AM---On 4/11/2018 5:09 PM, Michael Still wrote: ><br>> <br>> From: Matt Riedemann <mriedemos@gmail.com><br>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<br>> Date: 04/12/2018 08:46 AM<br>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Deployers] Optional, platform<br>> specific, dependancies in requirements.txt<br>> <br>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> On 4/11/2018 5:09 PM, Michael Still wrote:<br>>><br>>><br>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__review.openstack.org_-23_c_523387&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=212PUwLYOBlJZ3BiZNuJIFkRfqXoBPJDcWYCDk7vCHg&s=CNosrTHnAR21zOI52fnDRfTqu2zPiAn2oW9f67Qijo4&e= proposes<br>> adding a z/VM specific<br>>> dependancy to nova's requirements.txt. When I objected the counter<br>>> argument is that we have examples of windows specific dependancies<br>>> (os-win) and powervm specific dependancies in that file already.<br>>><br>>> I think perhaps all three are a mistake and should be removed.<br>>><br>>> My recollection is that for drivers like ironic which may not be<br>>> deployed by everyone, we have the dependancy documented, and then loaded<br>>> at runtime by the driver itself instead of adding it to<br>>> requirements.txt. This is to stop pip for auto-installing the dependancy<br>>> for anyone who wants to run nova. I had assumed this was at the request<br>>> of the deployer community.<br>>><br>>> So what do we do with z/VM? Do we clean this up? Or do we now allow<br>>> dependancies that are only useful to a very small number of deployments<br>>> into requirements.txt?<br>> <br>> As Eric pointed out in the review, this came up when pypowervm was added:<br>> <br>> </font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__review.openstack.org_-23_c_438119_5_requirements.txt&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=212PUwLYOBlJZ3BiZNuJIFkRfqXoBPJDcWYCDk7vCHg&s=iyKxF-CcGAFmnQs8B7d5u2zwEiJqq8ivETmrgB77PEg&e=">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__review.openstack.org_-23_c_438119_5_requirements.txt&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=212PUwLYOBlJZ3BiZNuJIFkRfqXoBPJDcWYCDk7vCHg&s=iyKxF-CcGAFmnQs8B7d5u2zwEiJqq8ivETmrgB77PEg&e=</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br>> <br>> And you're asking the same questions I did in there, which was, should<br>> it go into test-requirements.txt like oslo.vmware and<br>> python-ironicclient, or should it go under [extras], or go into<br>> requirements.txt like os-win (we also have the xenapi library now too).<br>> <br>> I don't really think all of these optional packages should be in<br>> requirements.txt, but we should just be consistent with whatever we do,<br>> be that test-requirements.txt or [extras]. I remember caring more about<br>> this back in my rpm packaging days when we actually tracked what was in<br>> requirements.txt to base what needed to go into the rpm spec, unlike<br>> Fedora rpm specs which just zero out requirements.txt and depend on<br>> their own knowledge of what needs to be installed (which is sometimes<br>> lacking or lagging master).<br>> <br>> I also seem to remember that [extras] was less than user-friendly for<br>> some reason, but maybe that was just because of how our CI jobs are<br>> setup? Or I'm just making that up. I know it's pretty simple to install<br>> the stuff from extras for tox runs, it's just an extra set of<br>> dependencies to list in the tox.ini.<br>> <br>> Having said all this, I don't have the energy to help push for<br>> consistency myself, but will happily watch you from the sidelines.<br>> <br>> -- <br>> <br>> Thanks,<br>> <br>> Matt<br>> <br>> __________________________________________________________________________<br>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<br>> </font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=212PUwLYOBlJZ3BiZNuJIFkRfqXoBPJDcWYCDk7vCHg&s=2FioyzCRtztysjjEqCrBTkpQs_wwfs3Mt2wGDkrft-s&e=">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=212PUwLYOBlJZ3BiZNuJIFkRfqXoBPJDcWYCDk7vCHg&s=2FioyzCRtztysjjEqCrBTkpQs_wwfs3Mt2wGDkrft-s&e=</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> __________________________________________________________________________<br>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<br>> </font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=9cPFSQlrAGTIS7x9O7dhxGFALDYV3Seub-sXD2DCrTU&s=lUPkxIEZrxiuKhJbLkU01LqAARcIVXal0mWjmdV5ksE&e=">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=9cPFSQlrAGTIS7x9O7dhxGFALDYV3Seub-sXD2DCrTU&s=lUPkxIEZrxiuKhJbLkU01LqAARcIVXal0mWjmdV5ksE&e=</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br>> <br><br>__________________________________________________________________________<br>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<br></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=9cPFSQlrAGTIS7x9O7dhxGFALDYV3Seub-sXD2DCrTU&s=lUPkxIEZrxiuKhJbLkU01LqAARcIVXal0mWjmdV5ksE&e=">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=8sI5aZT88Uetyy_XsOddbPjIiLSGM-sFnua3lLy2Xr0&m=9cPFSQlrAGTIS7x9O7dhxGFALDYV3Seub-sXD2DCrTU&s=lUPkxIEZrxiuKhJbLkU01LqAARcIVXal0mWjmdV5ksE&e=</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br><br></font></tt><br><br><BR>
</body></html>