skyline patch merging, release and backports
Hello, It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members. There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy? fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open Thanks. — Doug
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
Hello,
It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members.
There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy?
fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open
Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance. Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where: - New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.). I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution.
Thanks. — Doug
[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
Hello, I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline. We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts: 1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them. 2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity. 3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication. 4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve. Thanks Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com>Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00))To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com>Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backportsOn Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
Hello,
It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members.
There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy?
fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open
Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance. Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where: - New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.). I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution.
Thanks. — Doug
[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
So I’ll be honest, I’m only interested in this from an OpenStack Helm standpoint and the containers that are used there. Previously the OpenStack Helm PTL added Skyline to the repo but couldn’t get a container to build. He engaged the mailing list and submitted a patch but ultimately had to build a one off container which isn’t a situation I’d like to keep us in. What I would like is to be able to build the stable branches (2025.1, 2025.2) and master on a regular cadence and we cannot. I’ve asked around and folks have had problems building them regularly. I know there was a previous thread about adding maintainers and a few people replied so I’ve chased them down and they’ve said they have tried to get engaged but couldn’t. This last part is what’s caused me some alarm with my TC hat on and resulted in me starting the ML post. I don’t want the TC to force any changes. I would very much like the project to operate and add maintainers that the core folks see fit. The current core members are absolutely going to be experts in the code base. So I want to figure out how we can help make the project more healthy. Something that I’ve brought up more than once in TC meetings are projects that say that they need contributors but then turn those contributors away. This is what’s currently happening with Skyline and that’s a concern to me. Sowmya’s organization has made a fork of Skyline cause of this, I’m okay naming them since they’re my employer as well and I’ve made a big stink about that part of the company needing to try harder to engage upstream. As for the other folks that I’ve spoken to since its been off-list I won’t name them unless they chose to name themselves. So to summarize. I want to have Skyline be a healthy project. To me that means: 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback If that means the core maintainers mentoring some new maintainers then that should be something that some effort is put into. Thanks. — Doug
On Sep 26, 2025, at 8:53 AM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> wrote:
Hello,
I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline.
We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts:
1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them.
2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity.
3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication.
4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve.
Thanks
Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang
Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com <mailto:gouthampravi@gmail.com>> Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00)) To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>> Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev <mailto:horace@openinfra.dev>> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com <mailto:zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com <mailto:sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com <mailto:cardoe@cardoe.com>> Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
Hello,
It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members.
There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy?
fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open
Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance.
Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where:
- New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.).
I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution.
Thanks. — Doug
[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
So I know I’m replying to my own email but I figured I’d mention some patches. I’m trying to help out the project by suggesting backports and engaging with patch contributors. You mentioned https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 in your email and said you didn’t see a point to it but per the author and Jingwei’s comment its necessary for https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/957801 I’ve given the author some review comments. I’ve also gone ahead and applied another fix to https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/961595 so the skyline-apiserver will pass tests. On the skyline-apiserver side the release patches aren’t passing and I’m guessing they need this. We should land the patches for the release: - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961168/ - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961169 - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961170 But I’m not sure if that’ll need https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 backported to it first. Thanks. — Doug
On Sep 26, 2025, at 6:25 PM, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
So I’ll be honest, I’m only interested in this from an OpenStack Helm standpoint and the containers that are used there. Previously the OpenStack Helm PTL added Skyline to the repo but couldn’t get a container to build. He engaged the mailing list and submitted a patch but ultimately had to build a one off container which isn’t a situation I’d like to keep us in. What I would like is to be able to build the stable branches (2025.1, 2025.2) and master on a regular cadence and we cannot. I’ve asked around and folks have had problems building them regularly. I know there was a previous thread about adding maintainers and a few people replied so I’ve chased them down and they’ve said they have tried to get engaged but couldn’t. This last part is what’s caused me some alarm with my TC hat on and resulted in me starting the ML post.
I don’t want the TC to force any changes. I would very much like the project to operate and add maintainers that the core folks see fit. The current core members are absolutely going to be experts in the code base. So I want to figure out how we can help make the project more healthy. Something that I’ve brought up more than once in TC meetings are projects that say that they need contributors but then turn those contributors away. This is what’s currently happening with Skyline and that’s a concern to me. Sowmya’s organization has made a fork of Skyline cause of this, I’m okay naming them since they’re my employer as well and I’ve made a big stink about that part of the company needing to try harder to engage upstream. As for the other folks that I’ve spoken to since its been off-list I won’t name them unless they chose to name themselves.
So to summarize.
I want to have Skyline be a healthy project. To me that means: 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback
If that means the core maintainers mentoring some new maintainers then that should be something that some effort is put into.
Thanks. — Doug
On Sep 26, 2025, at 8:53 AM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> wrote:
Hello,
I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline.
We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts:
1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them.
2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity.
3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication.
4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve.
Thanks
Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang
Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com <mailto:gouthampravi@gmail.com>> Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00)) To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>> Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev <mailto:horace@openinfra.dev>> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com <mailto:zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com <mailto:sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com <mailto:cardoe@cardoe.com>> Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
Hello,
It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members.
There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy?
fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open
Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance.
Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where:
- New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.).
I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution.
Thanks. — Doug
[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
Hello Since we launched this project from 99cloud, we have hoped it would develop in a healthy way. This month, 99cloud has adjusted its business direction. Zhang Jingwei and I will move to Algoblu, and Algoblu will continue to support open-source contributions to OpenStack. Zhu Boxiang has also joined a new company, and he will also continue to support contributions to the OpenStack Skyline project. Regarding the suggestions in the previous email, Points 1 and 2 are related to the same issue (CI), while Point 3 pertains to another (code review): 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback Besides the inactive core members, the remaining active core developers can only commit 0.5 days per week to Skyline’s open-source work. Solving problems depends not only on good intentions but also on considering the actual time and effort we can invest. If Skyline is truly useful to everyone, it is reasonable for new core members from other organizations to join and co-maintain the project. Here’s what I think we can do next: 1) Address the long-term issue: Recruit new core members and have them work with us on CI and code review. 2) Resolve the immediate issue: Of the two patches for CI fixes, one has already been merged, and the other is in the process of being merged. So let’s keep moving forward. Please nominate new core members to join us in this work—this is what we have been striving for all along. Open source is not the responsibility of a single organization, nor should there be any sectarianism. Thanks BR Wu Wenxiang ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Doug Goldstein"<cardoe@cardoe.com>; Date: Sat, Sep 27, 2025 07:25 AM To: "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>; Cc: "Goutham Pacha Ravi"<gouthampravi@gmail.com>; "OpenStack Discuss"<openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; "zhu.boxiang"<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>; "horace"<horace@openinfra.dev>; "zhang.jingwei"<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>; "sowmya.kamavaram"<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>; "haoyang"<haoyang@openinfra.dev>; "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com>; Subject: Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports So I’ll be honest, I’m only interested in this from an OpenStack Helm standpoint and the containers that are used there. Previously the OpenStack Helm PTL added Skyline to the repo but couldn’t get a container to build. He engaged the mailing list and submitted a patch but ultimately had to build a one off container which isn’t a situation I’d like to keep us in. What I would like is to be able to build the stable branches (2025.1, 2025.2) and master on a regular cadence and we cannot. I’ve asked around and folks have had problems building them regularly. I know there was a previous thread about adding maintainers and a few people replied so I’ve chased them down and they’ve said they have tried to get engaged but couldn’t. This last part is what’s caused me some alarm with my TC hat on and resulted in me starting the ML post. I don’t want the TC to force any changes. I would very much like the project to operate and add maintainers that the core folks see fit. The current core members are absolutely going to be experts in the code base. So I want to figure out how we can help make the project more healthy. Something that I’ve brought up more than once in TC meetings are projects that say that they need contributors but then turn those contributors away. This is what’s currently happening with Skyline and that’s a concern to me. Sowmya’s organization has made a fork of Skyline cause of this, I’m okay naming them since they’re my employer as well and I’ve made a big stink about that part of the company needing to try harder to engage upstream. As for the other folks that I’ve spoken to since its been off-list I won’t name them unless they chose to name themselves. So to summarize. I want to have Skyline be a healthy project. To me that means: 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback If that means the core maintainers mentoring some new maintainers then that should be something that some effort is put into. Thanks. — Doug On Sep 26, 2025, at 8:53 AM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> wrote: Hello, I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline. We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts: 1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them. 2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity. 3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication. 4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve. Thanks Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com> Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00)) To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members. > > There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy? > > fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 > fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 > open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open > open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance. Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where: - New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.). I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution. > > Thanks. > — > Doug [1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
So please don’t take my thread as saying you’ve done anything wrong with the project. You’ve done the right thing and are doing your best to keep the project going. I completely understand and appreciate that. I see you’ve been taking time this weekend to get the patches merged to get the CI back into a happy state so thank you for that as well. Let’s now focus on what can we do for Skyline going forward so spread the workload around and not depend on any one person or any one company. — Doug
On Sep 26, 2025, at 7:17 PM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com> wrote:
Hello
Since we launched this project from 99cloud, we have hoped it would develop in a healthy way.
This month, 99cloud has adjusted its business direction. Zhang Jingwei and I will move to Algoblu, and Algoblu will continue to support open-source contributions to OpenStack. Zhu Boxiang has also joined a new company, and he will also continue to support contributions to the OpenStack Skyline project.
Regarding the suggestions in the previous email, Points 1 and 2 are related to the same issue (CI), while Point 3 pertains to another (code review):
1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback
Besides the inactive core members, the remaining active core developers can only commit 0.5 days per week to Skyline’s open-source work. Solving problems depends not only on good intentions but also on considering the actual time and effort we can invest. If Skyline is truly useful to everyone, it is reasonable for new core members from other organizations to join and co-maintain the project.
Here’s what I think we can do next: 1) Address the long-term issue: Recruit new core members and have them work with us on CI and code review. 2) Resolve the immediate issue: Of the two patches for CI fixes, one has already been merged, and the other is in the process of being merged.
So let’s keep moving forward. Please nominate new core members to join us in this work—this is what we have been striving for all along. Open source is not the responsibility of a single organization, nor should there be any sectarianism.
Thanks
BR Wu Wenxiang
------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Doug Goldstein"<cardoe@cardoe.com>; Date: Sat, Sep 27, 2025 07:25 AM To: "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>; Cc: "Goutham Pacha Ravi"<gouthampravi@gmail.com>; "OpenStack Discuss"<openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; "zhu.boxiang"<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>; "horace"<horace@openinfra.dev>; "zhang.jingwei"<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>; "sowmya.kamavaram"<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>; "haoyang"<haoyang@openinfra.dev>; "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com>; Subject: Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports
So I’ll be honest, I’m only interested in this from an OpenStack Helm standpoint and the containers that are used there. Previously the OpenStack Helm PTL added Skyline to the repo but couldn’t get a container to build. He engaged the mailing list and submitted a patch but ultimately had to build a one off container which isn’t a situation I’d like to keep us in. What I would like is to be able to build the stable branches (2025.1, 2025.2) and master on a regular cadence and we cannot. I’ve asked around and folks have had problems building them regularly. I know there was a previous thread about adding maintainers and a few people replied so I’ve chased them down and they’ve said they have tried to get engaged but couldn’t. This last part is what’s caused me some alarm with my TC hat on and resulted in me starting the ML post.
I don’t want the TC to force any changes. I would very much like the project to operate and add maintainers that the core folks see fit. The current core members are absolutely going to be experts in the code base. So I want to figure out how we can help make the project more healthy. Something that I’ve brought up more than once in TC meetings are projects that say that they need contributors but then turn those contributors away. This is what’s currently happening with Skyline and that’s a concern to me. Sowmya’s organization has made a fork of Skyline cause of this, I’m okay naming them since they’re my employer as well and I’ve made a big stink about that part of the company needing to try harder to engage upstream. As for the other folks that I’ve spoken to since its been off-list I won’t name them unless they chose to name themselves.
So to summarize.
I want to have Skyline be a healthy project. To me that means: 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback
If that means the core maintainers mentoring some new maintainers then that should be something that some effort is put into.
Thanks. — Doug
On Sep 26, 2025, at 8:53 AM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> wrote:
Hello,
I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline.
We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts:
1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them.
2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity.
3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication.
4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve.
Thanks
Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang
Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com <mailto:gouthampravi@gmail.com>> Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00)) To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>> Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev <mailto:horace@openinfra.dev>> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com <mailto:zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net <mailto:wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com <mailto:sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com <mailto:cardoe@cardoe.com>> Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
Hello,
It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members.
There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy?
fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open
Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance.
Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where:
- New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.).
I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution.
Thanks. — Doug
[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
Thank you for clarifying that you didn’t mean to blame me, and for your understanding and recognition of my work—it’s also what I should do to keep the project on track, like spending this weekend handling patches to get the CI back to a stable state. As I mentioned in my previous email, let’s focus on how to move forward with the project (which aligns well with your thought of spreading the workload and avoiding over-reliance on any single person or company): 1) Solving project issues doesn’t rely solely on enthusiasm; it also requires practical investment of time and energy from more team members—this is the foundation of sharing the workload effectively. 2) To build this foundation, TC or other team members could nominate new core members and invite them to contribute continuously. This way, we can strengthen the team and better distribute the work pressure. BR Wu Wenxiang ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Doug Goldstein"<cardoe@cardoe.com>; Date: Sun, Sep 28, 2025 07:44 AM To: "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com>; Cc: "OpenStack Discuss"<openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; "zhu.boxiang"<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>; "horace"<horace@openinfra.dev>; "zhang.jingwei"<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>; "sowmya.kamavaram"<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>; "haoyang"<haoyang@openinfra.dev>; "秦华"<edward.qin@algoblu.com>; Subject: Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports So please don’t take my thread as saying you’ve done anything wrong with the project. You’ve done the right thing and are doing your best to keep the project going. I completely understand and appreciate that. I see you’ve been taking time this weekend to get the patches merged to get the CI back into a happy state so thank you for that as well. Let’s now focus on what can we do for Skyline going forward so spread the workload around and not depend on any one person or any one company. — Doug On Sep 26, 2025, at 7:17 PM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com> wrote: Hello Since we launched this project from 99cloud, we have hoped it would develop in a healthy way. This month, 99cloud has adjusted its business direction. Zhang Jingwei and I will move to Algoblu, and Algoblu will continue to support open-source contributions to OpenStack. Zhu Boxiang has also joined a new company, and he will also continue to support contributions to the OpenStack Skyline project. Regarding the suggestions in the previous email, Points 1 and 2 are related to the same issue (CI), while Point 3 pertains to another (code review): 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback Besides the inactive core members, the remaining active core developers can only commit 0.5 days per week to Skyline’s open-source work. Solving problems depends not only on good intentions but also on considering the actual time and effort we can invest. If Skyline is truly useful to everyone, it is reasonable for new core members from other organizations to join and co-maintain the project. Here’s what I think we can do next: 1) Address the long-term issue: Recruit new core members and have them work with us on CI and code review. 2) Resolve the immediate issue: Of the two patches for CI fixes, one has already been merged, and the other is in the process of being merged. So let’s keep moving forward. Please nominate new core members to join us in this work—this is what we have been striving for all along. Open source is not the responsibility of a single organization, nor should there be any sectarianism. Thanks BR Wu Wenxiang ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Doug Goldstein"<cardoe@cardoe.com>; Date: Sat, Sep 27, 2025 07:25 AM To: "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net>; Cc: "Goutham Pacha Ravi"<gouthampravi@gmail.com>; "OpenStack Discuss"<openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>; "zhu.boxiang"<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net>; "horace"<horace@openinfra.dev>; "zhang.jingwei"<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com>; "sowmya.kamavaram"<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com>; "haoyang"<haoyang@openinfra.dev>; "吴文相"<wu.wenxiang@algoblu.com>; Subject: Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports So I’ll be honest, I’m only interested in this from an OpenStack Helm standpoint and the containers that are used there. Previously the OpenStack Helm PTL added Skyline to the repo but couldn’t get a container to build. He engaged the mailing list and submitted a patch but ultimately had to build a one off container which isn’t a situation I’d like to keep us in. What I would like is to be able to build the stable branches (2025.1, 2025.2) and master on a regular cadence and we cannot. I’ve asked around and folks have had problems building them regularly. I know there was a previous thread about adding maintainers and a few people replied so I’ve chased them down and they’ve said they have tried to get engaged but couldn’t. This last part is what’s caused me some alarm with my TC hat on and resulted in me starting the ML post. I don’t want the TC to force any changes. I would very much like the project to operate and add maintainers that the core folks see fit. The current core members are absolutely going to be experts in the code base. So I want to figure out how we can help make the project more healthy. Something that I’ve brought up more than once in TC meetings are projects that say that they need contributors but then turn those contributors away. This is what’s currently happening with Skyline and that’s a concern to me. Sowmya’s organization has made a fork of Skyline cause of this, I’m okay naming them since they’re my employer as well and I’ve made a big stink about that part of the company needing to try harder to engage upstream. As for the other folks that I’ve spoken to since its been off-list I won’t name them unless they chose to name themselves. So to summarize. I want to have Skyline be a healthy project. To me that means: 1) CI loop that should pass on stable and master 2) regular releases from the core maintainers and not just a default release made by the release team due to a lack of a response 3) engagement with contributors that submit patches, especially when they ask for feedback If that means the core maintainers mentoring some new maintainers then that should be something that some effort is put into. Thanks. — Doug On Sep 26, 2025, at 8:53 AM, 吴文相 <wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> wrote: Hello, I'm glad the community has emails regarding Skyline. We can discuss and resolve issues based on facts: 1. Contrary to what was mentioned in the previous email, it’s not true that there have been no non-core submissions or code reviews for Skyline since June 12th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957099, ZHAOWANGSHU submitted a patch and merged it on August 14th. For https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-apiserver/+/957743 on September 23rd, I thought this patch was meaningless, so I gave a -1. There are indeed some issues with CI, but it’s not completely down. From June to August, I spent a lot of time converting the entire Skyline API server from asynchronous (async) mode to synchronous (sync) mode—this was to lower the barrier for participants and make the code easier to maintain. Earlier, from February to March, when DevStack was migrated to version 24.04, CI also had issues for a period of time, but we resolved them. 2. The fact that the CI issue is being brought up this time is because more people are paying attention to it, which is a good thing. The Skyline core team has always been relatively small; only three of us—myself, Zhu Boxiang, and Zhang Jingwei—are still continuously conducting code reviews and contributing code. I only have about half a day per week to dedicate to open-source work, and the other two core members are in a similar situation. Therefore, we definitely hope to have new core members join us, and resolving this CI issue seems like a good opportunity. 3. I have had some communications with Haoyang, and more frequent communications in the future will certainly be beneficial—especially those based on code reviews. Personally, I don’t particularly like meetings: first, due to time zone differences, and second, due to challenges in verbal expression. Emails allow things to be explained more clearly, and code reviews can describe specific issues in greater detail. Haoyang can also help us achieve smoother communication. 4. Nowadays, large-model programming has greatly improved efficiency, which is a boon for open source. It reduces the time we spend troubleshooting issues and writing code, and lowers the cost of project maintenance. With new core members joining, I believe many things will improve. Thanks Best Regrads Wu Wenxiang Original: From：Goutham Pacha Ravi <gouthampravi@gmail.com> Date：2025-09-26 01:40:09(中国 (GMT+08:00)) To：OpenStack Discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org> Cc：zhu.boxiang<zhu.boxiang@99cloud.net> , horace <horace@openinfra.dev> , zhang.jingwei<zhang.jingwei@algoblu.com> , 吴文相<wu.wenxiang@99cloud.net> , sowmya.kamavaram<sowmya.kamavaram@rackspace.com> , Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> Subject：Re: skyline patch merging, release and backports On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > It appears that skyline, both skyline-console and skyline-apiserver, have been broken from a test standpoint for a bit. Additionally the last patch from not one of the core members that has been merged was June 12th, which is also the last time a core member has commented on a patch not from the core members. > > There has been a recent uptick in contributors coming from another organization and I would like to help see their contributions land. Some of these are fixes so that the tests actually pass as well as fixes for other bugs and new features. There have also been requests for backports to 2025.1. What do we need to get this work to start landing and make sure this project stays healthy? > > fix for skyline-console tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 > fix for one of the two failing skyline-apiserver tests: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/skyline-console/+/961092 > open skyline-apiserver changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-apiserver+status:open > open skyline-console changes: https://review.opendev.org/q/project:openstack/skyline-console+status:open Thank you for highlighting these patches. As we noted during numerous discussions on #openstack-tc, the underlying concern here is that the Skyline team is small, and apparently, they've had recent challenges to deal with alongside project/community maintenance. Besides that, over the past few years, the team hasn't grown despite the growth in project usage. I want to take the opportunity to urge the team to actively consider adding new core reviewers to help with some of the bandwidth concerns. In another thread [1], we were looking for volunteers that could help the team, and Skyline's PTL, Wu Wenxiang, has stated that they'd welcome any new contributors—but we have a chicken-and-egg problem where: - New contributors will need to establish their knowledge of the codebase and trust with the rest of the core team to be anointed as core reviewers. - The existing team doesn't seem to have the bandwidth or time to engage and are mired with challenges (firewalls, language and time zone barriers, little or no presence on OFTC's #openstack-skyline channel, no PTG discussions, etc.). I'd like to break this logjam. If these CI fixes can't be prioritized by the team, it affects code delivery processes in OpenStack, and the project is hostile towards new/interested contributors no matter the well-meaning intentions of the current core team. We'll be discussing this issue in the OpenStack TC's weekly meeting next week (Sept. 29th, 2025) [2]. I'm inviting the Skyline team to participate; if it's harder to meet in sync, please feel free to respond to this thread with your thoughts for resolution. > > Thanks. > — > Doug [1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.... [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda
participants (4)
-
Doug Goldstein
-
Goutham Pacha Ravi
-
吴文相
-
吴文相