Open Stack

On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 11:49 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:39:44AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > What do you mean by "dangerous code merging" in the subject? The body of
> > your mail doesn't make any reference to whatever "danger" you're seeing.
> > 
> > On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 14:16 +0400, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > Could somebody answer me, why we are merging oslo code in other projects
> > > and don't use
> > > git submodules (http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Submodules)
> > 
> > The idea of using submodules has come a few times. I don't have a
> > fundamental objection to it, except any time I've seen submodules used
> > in a project they've been extremely painful for everyone involved.
> > 
> > I'd be happy to look at a demo of a submodule based system for projects
> > to use code from oslo-incubator.
> 
> submodules certainly could work as a way to avoid the cut+paste
> approach we currently do. I agree though that they do add an
> extra layer of pain & suffering for developers who don't fully
> understand what they're doing. We use them in libvirt and try
> to hide the pain behind clever scripts which attempt to keep
> the submodule properly synced, but we still get pretty frequent
> problem reports from devs who've managed to get themselves into
> a mess with the submodule state.

Yes, libvirt forms part of my negative experience of submodules :)

> If we want to improve our interaction with oslo then IMHO more
> effort should be spent on turning bits of oslo-incubator into
> stable, standalone modules, removing the cut+paste need entirely.

Totally. Code is not intended to live in oslo-incubator forever and
we're having increasing success in moving stuff out:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Oslo#Libraries

Cheers,
Mark.