Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
Hi Lajos， I understand that the process is to retire neutron-fwaas first, and then create a new project in the X namespace. If want to retire the project, do we need to wait until the stable version(Victoria) of the project is no longer maintained(Extended Maintenance estimated 2022-04-27)? 发件人: Lajos Katona [mailto:katonalala@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2022年1月18日 0:15 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: miguel@mlavalle.com; openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org; Heng Zhou (周恒)-浪潮数据 <zhouhenglc@inspur.com> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived? Hi, Neutron team discussed this question on the Drivers meeting, see the logs: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2... The agreement is to move neutron-fwaas to x/ namespace, and revive it as x/neutron-fwaas. Best regards Lajos Katona (lajoskatona) Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 6., Cs, 2:30): Hi，Miguel， Ok，let’s meet at January 14th. Best regards 发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com <mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com> ] 发送时间: 2022年1月6日 9:12 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > 抄送: openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived? Hi Qin, Unfortunately, this coming January 7th several members of the drivers team will be off on holiday. We won't have a quorum to discuss your proposal. I hope that January 14th works for you and your team. Best regards Miguel On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 10:18 AM Miguel Lavalle <miguel@mlavalle.com <mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com> > wrote: Hi Qin, I have added this topic to the drivers meeting agenda (see on demand agenda close to the bottom): https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers Cheers On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 7:42 PM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > wrote: Hi Miguel, Thank you for your suggestion. My colleague HengZhou will submit relevant documents as soon as possible in accordance with the official neutron rules. Yes，we will attend the neutron drivers meeting on January 7th. Merry Christmas! Best wish for you! 发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com <mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com> ] 发送时间: 2021年12月24日 0:43 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > 抄送: openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived? Hi Qin, In preparation for your meeting with the drivers team, I suggest we follow as a starting point the Neutron Stadium Governance rules and processes as outlined in the official documentation: https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm.... In the past, we have re-incorporated projects to the Stadium, like for example in the case of neutron-vpnaas. This document in the Neutron specs repo summarizes how we assessed the readiness of vpnaas for the stadium: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/stadium/queens/neu... (https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-specs/+/506012). I suggest you start a similar document for fwaas in the folder for the current cycle: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/yoga/index.html. As soon as you can, please push it to gerrit, so we can start reviewing it. Did I understand correctly that you will attend the drivers meeting on January 7th? Best regards Miguel On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 8:09 PM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > wrote: Hi Miguel, I am glad to hear this news. How about our discussion on January 7th, this Friday is not convenient, what do I need to prepare before the discussion, do I need to submit rfe or other descriptions? 发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto: <mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com> miguel@mlavalle.com] 发送时间: 2021年12月23日 0:20 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 < <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived? Hi Qin, I think that in principle the community will be delighted if you and your team can reactivate the project and maintain it. Probably the best next step is for you to attend the next Neutron drivers meeting (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers) so we can discuss the specifics of your proposal. This meeting takes place on Fridays at 1400 UTC over IRC in oftc.net <http://oftc.net> , channel #openstack-neutron. Due to the end of year festivities in much of Europe and America, the next meeting will take place until January 7th. Is that a good next step for you? If yes, I'll add this topic to the meeting's agenda. Best regards On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:29 AM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com <mailto:qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> > wrote: Hi： The firewall project is a necessary function when the project is delivered. The lack of firewall function after switching OVN is not acceptable to customers. We intend to maintain this project and develop the fwaas driver based on ovn. Whether the neutron-fwaas project can be reactivate? What should I do ?
---- On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 00:34:58 -0600 Heng Zhou (周恒)-浪潮数据 <zhouhenglc@inspur.com> wrote ----
Hi Lajos， I understand that the process is to retire neutron-fwaas first, and then create a new project in the X namespace. If want to retire the project, do we need to wait until the stable version(Victoria) of the project is no longer maintained(Extended Maintenance estimated 2022-04-27)?
We could do that but I do not think we need to hold you guys to maintain it in x/namespace. As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/824905 -gmann
发件人: Lajos Katona [mailto:katonalala@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2022年1月18日 0:15 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: miguel@mlavalle.com; openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org; Heng Zhou (周恒)-浪潮数据 <zhouhenglc@inspur.com> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
Hi, Neutron team discussed this question on the Drivers meeting, see the logs: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2...
The agreement is to move neutron-fwaas to x/ namespace, and revive it as x/neutron-fwaas.
Best regards Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 6., Cs, 2:30): Hi，Miguel，
Ok，let’s meet at January 14th.
Best regards
发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com] 发送时间: 2022年1月6日 9:12 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
Hi Qin,
Unfortunately, this coming January 7th several members of the drivers team will be off on holiday. We won't have a quorum to discuss your proposal. I hope that January 14th works for you and your team.
Best regards
Miguel
On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 10:18 AM Miguel Lavalle <miguel@mlavalle.com> wrote: Hi Qin,
I have added this topic to the drivers meeting agenda (see on demand agenda close to the bottom): https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers
Cheers
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 7:42 PM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> wrote: Hi Miguel, Thank you for your suggestion. My colleague HengZhou will submit relevant documents as soon as possible in accordance with the official neutron rules. Yes，we will attend the neutron drivers meeting on January 7th. Merry Christmas! Best wish for you!
发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com] 发送时间: 2021年12月24日 0:43 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
Hi Qin,
In preparation for your meeting with the drivers team, I suggest we follow as a starting point the Neutron Stadium Governance rules and processes as outlined in the official documentation: https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm.... In the past, we have re-incorporated projects to the Stadium, like for example in the case of neutron-vpnaas. This document in the Neutron specs repo summarizes how we assessed the readiness of vpnaas for the stadium: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/stadium/queens/neu... (https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-specs/+/506012). I suggest you start a similar document for fwaas in the folder for the current cycle: https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/yoga/index.html. As soon as you can, please push it to gerrit, so we can start reviewing it.
Did I understand correctly that you will attend the drivers meeting on January 7th?
Best regards
Miguel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 8:09 PM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> wrote: Hi Miguel, I am glad to hear this news. How about our discussion on January 7th, this Friday is not convenient, what do I need to prepare before the discussion, do I need to submit rfe or other descriptions?
发件人: Miguel Lavalle [mailto:miguel@mlavalle.com] 发送时间: 2021年12月23日 0:20 收件人: Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 抄送: openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
Hi Qin,
I think that in principle the community will be delighted if you and your team can reactivate the project and maintain it. Probably the best next step is for you to attend the next Neutron drivers meeting (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers) so we can discuss the specifics of your proposal. This meeting takes place on Fridays at 1400 UTC over IRC in oftc.net, channel #openstack-neutron. Due to the end of year festivities in much of Europe and America, the next meeting will take place until January 7th. Is that a good next step for you? If yes, I'll add this topic to the meeting's agenda.
Best regards
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:29 AM Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> wrote: Hi： The firewall project is a necessary function when the project is delivered. The lack of firewall function after switching OVN is not acceptable to customers. We intend to maintain this project and develop the fwaas driver based on ovn. Whether the neutron-fwaas project can be reactivate? What should I do ?
On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities. There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
Hi, Thanks for the advice. The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it. If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful. Lajos Katona (lajoskatona) Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58):
On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ----
Hi, Thanks for the advice. The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos, Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that to be in added in neutron stadium? If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds). -gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
Hi, Neutron team is open to include projects to the stadium group (that was the feeling during the meeting also when we discussed this topic) if there is a stable maintainer team behind the project. So as you mentioned it would be easier to avoid the back and forth movement of fwaas if possible. Lajos Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 19., Sze, 15:02):
Hi, Thanks for the advice. The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it
---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona < katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos,
Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that to be in added in neutron stadium?
If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds).
-gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
Hi, Today Neutron drivers team again discussed the topic of the maintenance of neutron-fwaas. The team agreed to include neutron-fwaas again to Neutron stadium, with the maintenance of Inspur and the guidance of Neutron core team, and with +2 rights to Inspur developers. The logs of the meeting: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2... The process for Stadium projects: https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm... Thanks for stepping in to maintaining and developing neutron-fwaas. Regards Lajos Katona (lajoskatona) Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 20., Cs, 10:07):
Hi, Neutron team is open to include projects to the stadium group (that was the feeling during the meeting also when we discussed this topic) if there is a stable maintainer team behind the project. So as you mentioned it would be easier to avoid the back and forth movement of fwaas if possible.
Lajos
Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 19., Sze, 15:02):
Hi, Thanks for the advice. The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it
---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona < katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos,
Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that to be in added in neutron stadium?
If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds).
-gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
---- On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:59:28 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ----
Hi,Today Neutron drivers team again discussed the topic of the maintenance of neutron-fwaas. The team agreed to include neutron-fwaas again to Neutron stadium, with the maintenance of Inspur and the guidance of Neutron core team, and with +2 rights to Inspur developers. The logs of the meeting:https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2... The process for Stadium projects:https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm... Thanks for stepping in to maintaining and developing neutron-fwaas.
Thanks lajoskatona, neutron team for reconsidering it. @ Inspur team, Plese propose the revert of deprecation of neutron-fwaas in governance. and after that we can setup the project-config, jobs things there. -gmann
RegardsLajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 20., Cs, 10:07): Hi,Neutron team is open to include projects to the stadium group (that was the feeling during the meeting also when we discussed this topic) if there is a stable maintainer team behind the project.So as you mentioned it would be easier to avoid the back and forth movement of fwaas if possible. Lajos
Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 19., Sze, 15:02): ---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ----
Hi, Thanks for the advice. The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos,
Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that to be in added in neutron stadium?
If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds).
-gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
Hi Ghanshyam: The next week is Chinese New Year, there will be some delay in replying. After the holiday, we will continue to communicate with the neutron team to discuss the revert of neutron-fwaas. -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Ghanshyam Mann [mailto:gmann@ghanshyammann.com] 发送时间: 2022年1月29日 3:09 收件人: Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> 抄送: Openstack Discuss List <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived? ---- On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:59:28 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- > Hi,Today Neutron drivers team again discussed the topic of the maintenance of neutron-fwaas.
The team agreed to include neutron-fwaas again to Neutron stadium, with the maintenance of Inspur and the guidance of Neutron core team, and with +2 rights to Inspur developers. The logs of the meeting:https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2... The process for Stadium projects:https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm... Thanks for stepping in to maintaining and developing neutron-fwaas.
Thanks lajoskatona, neutron team for reconsidering it. @ Inspur team, Plese propose the revert of deprecation of neutron-fwaas in governance. and after that we can setup the project-config, jobs things there. -gmann
RegardsLajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 20., Cs, 10:07): Hi,Neutron team is open to include projects to the stadium group (that was the feeling during the meeting also when we discussed this topic) if there is a stable maintainer team behind the project.So as you mentioned it would be easier to avoid the back and forth movement of fwaas if possible. Lajos
Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 19., Sze, 15:02): ---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- > > Hi, > > Thanks for the advice.
The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos,
Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that > to be in added in neutron stadium?
If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about > a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds).
-gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can > > > propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to > > > maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will > > > merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace > > > will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of > > churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, > > compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting > > them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team > > doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the > > conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then > > the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the > > repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the > > Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new > > category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight > > project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with > > a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack > > namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack > > coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having > > the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in > > making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as > > transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
Thanks Qin, Sure, have a nice ans safe holiday. Ping us once you are back for any help in the process. -gmann ---- On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 07:02:07 -0600 Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> wrote ----
Hi Ghanshyam: The next week is Chinese New Year, there will be some delay in replying. After the holiday, we will continue to communicate with the neutron team to discuss the revert of neutron-fwaas.
-----邮件原件----- 发件人: Ghanshyam Mann [mailto:gmann@ghanshyammann.com] 发送时间: 2022年1月29日 3:09 收件人: Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> 抄送: Openstack Discuss List <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团 <qinhaizhong01@inspur.com> 主题: Re: Can neutron-fwaas project be revived?
---- On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:59:28 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- > Hi,Today Neutron drivers team again discussed the topic of the maintenance of neutron-fwaas.
The team agreed to include neutron-fwaas again to Neutron stadium, with the maintenance of Inspur and the guidance of Neutron core team, and with +2 rights to Inspur developers. The logs of the meeting:https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2022/neutron_drivers.2... The process for Stadium projects:https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/stadium/governance.htm... Thanks for stepping in to maintaining and developing neutron-fwaas.
Thanks lajoskatona, neutron team for reconsidering it.
@ Inspur team, Plese propose the revert of deprecation of neutron-fwaas in governance. and after that we can setup the project-config, jobs things there.
-gmann
RegardsLajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 20., Cs, 10:07): Hi,Neutron team is open to include projects to the stadium group (that was the feeling during the meeting also when we discussed this topic) if there is a stable maintainer team behind the project.So as you mentioned it would be easier to avoid the back and forth movement of fwaas if possible. Lajos
Ghanshyam Mann <gmann@ghanshyammann.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 19., Sze, 15:02): ---- On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 02:23:39 -0600 Lajos Katona <katonalala@gmail.com> wrote ---- > > Hi, > > Thanks for the advice.
The intention from the Neutron team was to make it clear that the team currently has no capacity to help the maintenance of neutron-fwaas, and can't help to maintain it.If there's easier ways for volunteers to keep it maintained other than forking it to x/ namespace that would be really helpful.
Thanks Lajos,
Main point here is if it is maintained by current maintainer (inspur team or other developers) whether neutron team will consider that > to be in added in neutron stadium?
If yes, then it will be extra work to move to x/ namespace now and then bring back to openstack/. If no, then moving to x/ namespace is good option or if maintainer want to be in openstack then we can discuss about > a separate new project (but that needs more discussion on host much cost it adds).
-gmann
Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)
Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 18., K, 18:58): On 2022-01-18 10:49:48 -0600 (-0600), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: [...]
As discussed in project-config change[1], you or neutron folks can > > > propose the retirement now itself (considering there is no one to > > > maintain/release stable/victoria for new bug fixes) and TC will > > > merge it as per process. After that, creating it in x/ namespace > > > will be good to do. [...]
Looking at this from a logistical perspective, it's a fair amount of > > churn in code hosting as well as unwelcoming to the new volunteers, > > compared to just leaving the repository where it is now and letting > > them contribute to it there. If the concern is that the Neutron team > > doesn't want to retain responsibility for it while they evaluate the > > conviction of the new maintainers for eventual re-inclusion, then > > the TC would be well within its rights to declare that the > > repository can remain in place while not having it be part of the > > Neutron team's responsibilities.
There are a number of possible solutions, ranging from making a new > > category of provisional deliverable, to creating a lightweight > > project team under the DPL model, to declaring it a pop-up team with > > a TC-owned repository. There are repositories within the OpenStack > > namespace which are not an official part of the OpenStack > > coordinated release, after all. Solutions which don't involve having > > the new work take place somewhere separate, and the work involved in > > making that separate place, which will simply be closed down as > > transient cruft if everything goes as desired. -- Jeremy Stanley
participants (5)
-
Dazhong Qin (秦海中)-云数据中心集团
-
Ghanshyam Mann
-
Heng Zhou (周恒)-浪潮数据
-
Jeremy Stanley
-
Lajos Katona