On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:18 AM Bogdan Dobrelya <bdobreli@redhat.com> wrote:
On 06.04.2020 09:51, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:48 AM Lingxian Kong <anlin.kong@gmail.com <mailto:anlin.kong@gmail.com>> wrote:
I see we are talking about another "Gnocchi", when Gnocchi moved out
of
OpenStack, people said they could run Gnocchi in standalone mode
without
installing the other OpenStack services, then they changed default dependency of some other projects (Ceilometer, Panko, etc) to
Gnocchi.
As a result, they are all dead (or almost dead).
I'd be very careful comparing Ironic to Gnocchi/Telemetry. I think the fate that Telemetry met was largely due to staffing problems, more specifically, all large contributors pulling away from it. It would end up the same inside or outside of OpenStack.
Another example is a long time ago in one OpenStack project, there
was a
demand for secret management, people said, Barbican is not mature and not production ready yet, we shouldn't dependent on Barbican but
could
make it optional, as a result, Barbican never adopted in the project
in
real deployment.
I don't know much about the Barbican situation, but there may be other explanations. Some operators are against deploying any new service unless absolutely necessary, because any new service is a maintenance burden.
At the Denver PTG we were talking about non-Keystone authentication in Ironic. Keystone is arguably very trivial to install, and still it meets some resistance.
I have been involved in OpenStack community since 2013, I see people came and left, I see projects created and died, until now, there are only a few of projects alive and actively maintained. IMHO, as a community, we should try our best to integrate projects with each
other,
no project can live well without some others help， projects rarely stand or fall alone.
To be clear, my proposal does not affect this. Specifically: 1) I don't suggest reducing the number of integration points.
But having *more* integration points and functional duplication, like internal project's authorization, coordination (placement/messaging), shared libraries, indirectly reduce the integration points in OpenStack and pulls off contributors by spreading its focus on that otherwise would have been shipped and maintained "out of box" (or out of big tent). Not ranting, I understand that it is pointless to complain against inevitability.
On the other hand, not having some of these prevents adoption (for example, the requirement of RabbitMQ has been a huge deal for standalone adoption and was considered a blocker for metal3). Dmitry
2) Integration points with OpenStack services are already optional in Ironic.
What exactly is your concern? Ironic dropping integration points altogether? We don't plan on that.
Dmitry
Well, I'm not part of TC, I'm not the person or team can decide how Ironic project goes in this situation. But as a developer who is trying very hard to maintain several OpenStack projects, that what I'm thinking.
My 0.02.
- Best regards, Lingxian Kong Catalyst Cloud
-- Best regards, Bogdan Dobrelya, Irc #bogdando