[openstack-dev] [fuel][puppet] The state of collaboration: 5 weeks

Paul Belanger pabelanger at redhat.com
Mon Jul 20 15:57:38 UTC 2015

On 07/20/2015 11:24 AM, Alex Schultz wrote:
>> As a new contributor to any openstack project, this is the first thing I
>> do.  Find out when the weekly meetings is, attend and monitor the
>> conversion.  Almost always there is an open discussion at the end of the
>> weekly business.
>> Going back through the last 5 weeks of irclogs[1], I couldn't find any
>> references to 'fuel'.  I'm not trying to lay fault or blame, but perhaps a
>> something can be added to the agenda[2] each week giving a status update on
>> the puppet-fuel progress.
>> Over in openstack-infra we have a downstream-puppet effort that has been
>> spanning more then 6months now. Each week downstream developers raise any
>> new issues or code reviews that need eyes, for the most part I think it has
>> worked very well.
>> I think Mirantis / Fuel could do the same, a weekly update to give an
>> update on the effort. Any issues that need more eyes on, and patchsets that
>> have stalled.
>> Thoughts?
>> [1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/puppet_openstack/
>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/PuppetOpenStack
> So I know we had fuel members as a part of the meetings over the last few
> weeks[0][1]. I think there is some mis-understanding of how fuel uses the
> upstream modules.  Honestly, fuel is more like an operator in the way we
> are consuming these modules.   The fuel-library repository is not a normal
> puppet module, it's more of an environment role/profile setup specifically
> to act in concert with the other fuel projects.  At least from my view
> point, the fuel team isn't necessarily trying to make large sweeping
> changes in many of the core upstream modules.  There are a few instances
> where I would say there have been some larger changes, but overall I think
> the effort is to try and introduce additional ways to utilize the modules.
> Overall we're just trying to get them to work in our reference
> architecture[2].  Much of the issue with the upstream code being in the
> fuel-library repository is being worked on but it takes time to address all
> the issues by getting changes upstreamed, adjusting the usage, and being
> able to switch. I have personally made a large push[3] to start this
> endeavor. But as I mentioned early on in the previous email thread[4], help
> from others would be welcomed as this effort requires people from both
> sides to be successful.  I know for a fact that I personally have been
> trying to push from the fuel-library side to make sure that we can consume
> upstream modules as much as possible.  I feel saddened by this thread
> because I know I'm investing effort and pushing to correct the things being
> brought up but they aren't being seen or acknowledged as actually
> happening. I don't think anyone disagrees that we need to fix the state of
> fuel-library, but there needs to be some understanding that this will take
> time and we are in the process of making the requested changes.  An effort
> is being made from the fuel side, and I feel that the original email in
> this thread was sent to make sure that it is being recognized and make sure
> we are all working towards the previously discussed expectations.
Regarding your comments about fuel library. Have a look at the 
downstream-puppet effort over in openstack-infra.  We'd basically did 
the same thing, take embedded puppet modules and break them out into 
separate modules[1]. On thing that worked well for me, and I think 
others, was the weekly updates on IRC about the process.  Mostly, it 
gave downstream and cores the ability to sync weekly on the issues.

Now, the dynamics here are a little different, but I think the key is 
the cross collaboration. For, I am new into the puppet-openstack project 
(I am wanting better CI). However, if a list of reviews are brought to 
my attention, I don't have an issue reviewing and helping out.

Either way, don't look at my comments as fault or blame.  For me, I'm 
asking for the fuel team to state more clearly in the weekly meeting any 
issue they are having with reviews or patches.

> Thanks,
> -Alex
> [0]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/puppet_openstack/2015/puppet_openstack.2015-07-14-15.00.txt
> - xarses
> [1]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/puppet_openstack/2015/puppet_openstack.2015-07-07-15.00.txt
> - xarses, mwhahaha
> [2]
> https://docs.mirantis.com/openstack/fuel/fuel-6.1/reference-architecture.html#ref-arch
> [3] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/fuel-puppet-librarian
> [4] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-June/066675.html
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list