Why do we still rely on SQLAlchemy and do not request Michael Bayer to move the library under OpenStack governance? Most contributions come from a single maintainer. The project already uses Gerrit, so the contribution flow will be similar, right?
Also, do you believe that moving projects under OpenStack governance magically increases project aliveness?
Let's discuss the "ldappool" library. It is under OpenStack governance and is required for LDAP integration in Keystone. Is it alive? The last release was on February 26, 2021. This release includes a bug: the usage of a dependency that is missed in requirements.txt - the "six" library.
The fix waited for two years to be merged
https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ldappool/+/805495 , and there is no new release with it.
Hm... So, magic OpenStack governance did not help?! How did this happen?
Sorry for these sarcastic questions. I only tried to say that independently of project governance, the project may die and become unmaintained. The only valuable thing is the contributors.
Asking a project maintainer to move from "his" development flow to work under OpenStack governance before reducing "his real maintainer's costs" sounds strange.
If openstackers start actively contributing to Cotyledon, moving under OpenStack governance as Cotyledon community decision sounds reasonable to me. Otherwise, it doesn't sound nice. It is not "a chicken&egg problem"; the primary action should be obvious.