Open Stack

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022, 19:58 Ghanshyam Mann <gmann at ghanshyammann.com> wrote:

>  ---- On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 08:44:22 -0500  Sean Mooney <smooney at redhat.com>
> wrote ---
>  > On Tue, 2022-06-28 at 09:12 -0400, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>  > > Sorry for the late reply, I'm still catching up e-mail backlog and
> plan to
>  > > dig more in this thread at some point. I just wanted to answer Sean's
>  > > question very simply. See inline below:
>  > >
>  > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 9:59 AM Sean Mooney <smooney at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > > On Mon, 2022-06-27 at 15:30 +0200, Artem Goncharov wrote:
>  > > > > >
>  > > > > > ther eare some convince factors to github and many
> inconvenices.,
>  > > > > > it has a vastly inferior code review model that if i was force
> to use
>  > > > would push me out of the openstack comunity long term.
>  > > > > > im sure there are others too that feel stongly that moving to a
> github
>  > > > pull request based workflow woudl be a large regerssion
>  > > > > > and make them less inclined to continue working on openstack.
>  > > > >
>  > > > > The thread is being very explicit about external projects and not
> the
>  > > > OpenStack itself.
>  > > > yep but that is unhelpful.
>  > > > if any external project that work with openstack want to become
> part of
>  > > > openstack under the foundatiosn governace it is
>  > > > nolonger external.
>  > > >
>  > > > so if gophercloud was to become part of openstack it would not be
> external
>  > > > and if it wanted to you github pull requests
>  > > > for it workflow it woudl be deviating form the other openstack
> projects.
>  > > >
>  > > > external project that are not part of openstack governacne can use
> any
>  > > > tooling they like.
>  > > >
>  > > > if we start allowing arbiatry internal and external project to use
> gerrit
>  > > > or github workflows of worse both concurrently
>  > > > we will start getting request to supprot that for other proejct
> like nova
>  > > > neutron ectra. i woudl see that as damaging
>  > > > to the exsting colaberator based and something to be avoided if we
> can.
>  > > >
>  > > > im not really sure what gophercloud want to achive by being part of
>  > > > openstack without adopting the openstack
>  > > > ways of doing things that they cant acive by bing a nice go sdk for
>  > > > openstack on there own with the well wishes
>  > > > and or support of the openstack comunity.
>  > > >
>  > > > the 4 opens are a core part of the culture of openstack
>  > > > simiarly the ways of workign with irc/gerrit/zuul/ptgs are also a
> part of
>  > > > the openstack way.
>  > > >
>  > > > i am wondering why gophercloud want to actully becoem an offial
> proejct if
>  > > > they dont want to adopt the open developement workflow (note i did
> not say
>  > > > model) that openstack uses?
>  > > >
>  > >
>  > > I'm a Gophercloud maintainer and can provide some context. Some of us
> at
>  > > Red Hat inherited the project (
>  > > https://github.com/gophercloud/gophercloud/issues/2246) at the end
> of last
>  > > year. The first thing we did was to check if the project could fit
> under the
>  > > opendev umbrella as it seemed like the natural place to us. The
> discussion
>  > > was run in the open:
> https://github.com/gophercloud/gophercloud/issues/2257
>  > > and
>  > >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-November/025660.html
>  > > The main reasons were:
>  > > * Gain more sustainability, contributors around the community and more
>  > > diversity in maintainers
>  > > * More stable CI (not relevant anymore since we moved to Github
> Actions,
>  > > and we do not rely on openlab anymore)
>  > > * CI integration in other projects
>  > > * Better governance
>  >
>  > Thanks for that context.
>  >
>  > with that in mind im not sure it makes sense to proceed with movign it
> under openstack
>  > governance.
>  >
>  > i agree that it woudl be nice form a governance perspective to include
> it under the sdk team
>  > but if the opendev ways or workign dont work for the existing
> contibutor base im not sure
>  > it makes sense for ether comuntiy i do agree these ^ are good reasons
> to consider this change
>  > but im not conviced it woudl be good for openstack to add github
> hosting and review workflow.
>
> I might agree on all those points of not splitting the tooling but
> considering the current situation,
> I do not think we will have any new contributors in Gophercloud or any of
> the existing contributors
> will be contributing in Gophercloud so it hardly matters from the
> contributors' point of view if that is
> in GitHub or OpenDev. If SDK team is ok with Github then I think we should
> be ok.
>
> Yes, if we have a few existing contributors who want to contribute to
> Gophercloud  then
> it makes sense to have it in OpenDev otherwise I feel like we are stuck on
> process which
> can be more beneficial if we change it.
>
> -gmann
>
>  > >
>  > > When we asked the Gophercloud contributors about using gerrit, the
> feedback
>  > > wasn't positive (details in #2257) so at this point we decided to not
>  > > proceed further at the time.
>  > > Due to the nature of the project, a lot of our pull-requests are
> "drive-by
>  > > contributions" (e.g. to add new fields to the API) by new
> contributors;
>  > > which ought to be considered if we were going to Gerrit.
>  > >
>  > > That being said, if we get more contributions from the OpenStack
> community,
>  > > this would certainly help to justify the move under opendev.
>  >


Agree here. At some point in time processes might need to change to allow
growth or any evolution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20220628/d70e367b/attachment-0001.htm>