Open Stack

On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 08:27:54 -0700
Dan Smith <dms at danplanet.com> wrote:
> 
> Agreed, a stable virt driver API is not feasible or healthy at this
> point, IMHO. However, it doesn't change that much as it is. I know
> I'll be making changes to virt drivers in the coming cycle due to
> objects and I have no problem submitting the corresponding changes to
> the nova-extra-drivers tree for those drivers alongside any that go
> for the main one.

If the idea is to gate with nova-extra-drivers this could lead to a
rather painful process to change the virt driver API. When all the
drivers are in the same tree all of them can be updated at the same
time as the infrastructure. 

If they are in separate trees and Nova gates on nova-extra-drivers then
at least temporarily a backwards compatible API would have to remain so
the nova-extra-drivers tests still passed. The changes would then be
applied to nova-extra-drivers and finally a third changeset to remove
the backwards compatible code. 

We see this in tempest/nova or tempest/cinder occasionally (not often
as the APIs are stable) and its not very pretty. Ideally we'd be able to
link two changesets for different projects so they can be processed as
one. But without that ability I think splitting any drivers out and
continuing to gate on them would be bad.

Chris