Open Stack

On 11/12/2014 02:40 AM, Richard Jones wrote:
> On 12 November 2014 18:17, Matthias Runge <mrunge at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/11/14 10:53, Jiri Tomasek wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Thanks for writing this up!
>>
>>>> The Storyboard project has successfully integrated these tools into
>>>> the OpenStack CI environment.
>>
>> OpenStack CI and distributors are different, because OpenStack CI does
>> not distribute software.
>>
> 
> Ah, I wasn't clear; my concern was whether the tools chosen would be
> compatible with the CI environment. I'm hoping that distribution of the
> tools isn't our concern (see below).
u
>>> Using javascript tooling (yeoman, grunt, bower, etc.) has this issue of
>>> being dependent on nodejs which if I recall correctly is causing
>>> problems for packagers as some versions of these tools require different
>>> nodejs versions - please Mathias correct me if I am wrong. I know this
>>> discussion has been here before, but using these tools is necessary for
>>> effective development. So we need to resolve the problem asap.
>>> Storyboard does not have this issue as it is infra thing.
>>
>> As far as I know, those tools don't require different nodejs versions.
>> But: we can not have different node.js versions installed at the same
>> time. I assume, this is true for all distributions. Creating and
>> maintaining parallel installable versions just sucks and causes many
>> issues.
>>
> 
> I believe the nodeenv method of installing node solves this, as it's
> entirely local to the development environment.
> 

Just for the record, I believe that we should chose the tools that make
sense for making our software, as long as it's not physically impossible
for them to be packaged. This means we should absolutely not use things
that require multiple versions of node to be needed. The nodejs that's
in trusty is new enough to work with all of the modern javascript tool
chain things needed for this, so other than the various javascript tools
and libraries not being packaged in the distros yet, it should be fine.

That a bunch of javascript libraries will need to be distro pacakged
should not be a blocker (although I don't think that anyone is saying it
is) That is, after all, the important work the distros do. At this
point, given the popularity of javascript and javascript tooling, I'm
pretty sure the problem is going to have to be solved at some point.

> I will have to go through all dependencies and do a review, if those are
>> acceptable for inclusion e.g in Fedora. The same is true for Thomas
>> Goirand for inclusion in Debian.
>>
>>>
>>> Petr Belanyi has added optional jshint install for js linting into
>>> Horizon and it installs nodejs as it depends on it. Could this approach
>>> work for our need of js tooling too? [1]
>>
>> Sigh, this nonsense doesn't go away? This is the third time the same
>> issue comes up.
>>
>> jshint is NOT free software.
>>
>> https://github.com/jshint/jshint/blob/master/src/jshint.js#L19
>> <https://github.com/jshint/jshint/blob/master/src/jshint.js#L19>
> 
> 
> They're trying to resolve that https://github.com/jshint/jshint/issues/1234
> 
> But regardless, jshint doesn't have to be installed from a Linux
> repository; it's usually installed using npm alongside the other node tools.
> 
> 
>     Richard
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>