Open Stack

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
wrote:

>
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Eoghan Glynn <eglynn at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >>> At the end of the day, that's probably going to mean saying No to more
> >>> things. Everytime I turn around everyone wants the TC to say No to
> >>> things, just not to their particular thing. :) Which is human nature.
> >>> But I think if we don't start saying No to more things we're going to
> >>> end up with a pile of mud that no one is happy with.
> >>
> >> That we're being so abstract about all of this is frustrating. I get
> >> that no-one wants to start a flamewar, but can someone be concrete about
> >> what they feel we should say 'no' to but are likely to say 'yes' to?
> >>
> >>
> >> I'll bite, but please note this is a strawman.
> >>
> >> No:
> >> * Accepting any more projects into incubation until we are comfortable
> with
> >> the state of things again
> >> * Marconi
> >> * Ceilometer
> >
> > Well -1 to that, obviously, from me.
> >
> > Ceilometer is on track to fully execute on the gap analysis coverage
> > plan agreed with the TC at the outset of this cycle, and has an active
> > plan in progress to address architectural debt.
>
> Yes, there seems to be an attitude among several people in the community
> that the Ceilometer team denies that there are issues and refuses to work
> on them. Neither of those things is the case from our perspective.
>

Totally agree.


>
> Can you be more specific about the shortcomings you see in the project
> that aren’t being addressed?
>


Once again, this is just a strawman.

I'm just not sure OpenStack has 'blessed' the best solution out there.

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ceilometer/Graduation#Why_we_think_we.27re_ready

"

   - Successfully passed the challenge of being adopted by 3 related
   projects which have agreed to join or use ceilometer:
      - Synaps
      - Healthnmon
      - StackTach
      <https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=StackTach&action=edit&redlink=1>
      "


Stacktach seems to still be under active development (
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/stacktach/log/), is used by
rackspace in production and from everything I hear is more mature then
ceilometer.


>
> >
> >> Divert all cross project efforts from the following projects so we can
> focus
> >> our cross project resources. Once we are in a bitter place we can
> expand our
> >> cross project resources to cover these again. This doesn't mean removing
> >> anything.
> >> * Sahara
> >> * Trove
> >> * Tripleo
> >
> > You write as if cross-project efforts are both of fixed size and
> > amenable to centralized command & control.
> >
> > Neither of which is actually the case, IMO.
> >
> > Additional cross-project resources can be ponied up by the large
> > contributor companies, and existing cross-project resources are not
> > necessarily divertable on command.
>

Sure additional cross-project resources can and need to be ponied up, but I
am doubtful that will be enough.


>
> What “cross-project efforts” are we talking about? The liaison program in
> Oslo has been a qualified success so far. Would it make sense to extend
> that to other programs and say that each project needs at least one
> designated QA, Infra, Doc, etc. contact?
>
> Doug
>
> >
> >> Yes:
> >> * All integrated projects that are not listed above
> >
> > And what of the other pending graduation request?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Eoghan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140814/c3953aa9/attachment.html>