Open Stack

I would imagine we would want tags for any releases that have plugins
associated, or we are planning to have plugins associated (so, 6.0, 6.1,
7.0).

-----Original Message-----
From: Igor Kalnitsky [mailto:ikalnitsky at mirantis.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 9:46 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Plugins] Feedback

Hi Sheena,

Sure, I can do it. Should I push tag only for last release or for all
releases that are available on PyPI?

Thanks,
Igor

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Sheena Gregson <sgregson at mirantis.com>
wrote:
> So the only cores are Igor and Evgeniy?  Can one of you add tags for
> the new release versions?
>
>
>
> From: Sebastian Kalinowski [mailto:skalinowski at mirantis.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:02 AM
>
>
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Plugins] Feedback
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2015-07-30 14:50 GMT+02:00 Evgeniy L <eli at mirantis.com>:
>
> Hi Sheena,
>
>
>
> Created ticket to change the structure of the directories [1].
>
> And as far as I know any core can push tags into the repository,
>
> Sebastian, Igor and I.
>
>
>
> One correction: I'm not a core in fuel-plugins ;)
>
>
>
>
>
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1479785
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Sheena Gregson
> <sgregson at mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>
> Evgeniy –
>
>
>
> For the items which you have listed actions, who should be responsible
> for next steps?
>
>
>
> Sheena
>
>
>
> From: Evgeniy L [mailto:eli at mirantis.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 11:54 AM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Plugins] Feedback
>
>
>
> Hi Sergii, thank you for feedback,
>
>
>
>>> c. There is no documentation how to install fpb from github master
>>> branch. It's very useful for developers who want to use latest
>>> version. We should add something
>
>
>
> We had a documentation, but removed it because the newer fpb was
> released,
>
> probably we should add this information permanently [1].
>
>
>
>>> a. We are doing the same mistake putting all things into one basket.
>>> There should be 2 repositories. One for examples and one for fpb.
>>> What's the goal of keeping fpb in directory and examples on top?
>
>
>
> These plugins are the data which are required for integration testing,
>
> we test that plugin build is not broken, which we run when patch gets
>
> published. I see nothing wrong with having the data for integration
> testing
>
> in the same repository with product which should be tested.
>
> Also in previous release we *removed* all the plugins which are not
>
> related to the builder itself, lbaas and glusterfs.
>
>
>
>>> This breaks a couple of things
>
>
>
> Having data for testing in the repository doesn't break anything.
>
>
>
>>> b. I cannot build fpm with simple
>
>
>
> That is a good point, we should move code from fuel_plugin_builder
> directory
>
> on top level, and move data for testing into examples directory.
>
>
>
>>> c. There is no tags as I can see only stable/6.0
>
>
>
> Correct, tags should be added.
>
>
>
>>> d. There are no tests to improve code quality pep8 flask8, code
>>> coverage
>
>
>
> That is not true, there are more then one hundreds unit tests which we
> run
>
> for each patch with python 2.6 and python 2.7, also there are
> integration tests
>
> which check that for each patch we don't break validation and that we
> can
>
> build plugins for previous versions. Plus there are functional tests
> which are
>
> written by fuel-qa team, those tests check that we perform deployment
>
> with plugins and required functionality works correctly. Also there
> *is*
> pep8
>
> check [2].
>
>
>
>>> e. Repository doesn't follow community standards.
>
>
>
> I think this issue should be resolved with moving fuel_plugin_builder
> directory
>
> on level higher, if not, please provide more specific description what
> is wrong.
>
>
>
>>> 3. Setting tab ...
>
>
>
> Agree.
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Fuel%2FPlugins&diff=78677
> &oldid=78204
>
> [2]
> https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-plugins/blob/master/fuel_plugin_bui
> lder/tox.ini#L17-L21
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
> <sgolovatiuk at mirantis.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have started digging into plugins recently. There are many positive
> things though I would like to point to some problem areas
>
> 1. Documentation
>
> a. It doesn't include the features of 7.0. There are many outstanding
> features, though I needed to ping the developers to ask how these
> features work. It means that it's almost impossible to develop plugins
> for upcoming releases. The external developer needs to wait for
> documentation so it creates a lag between release and plugin release.
>
> b. in [1] the statement about 'For Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS' should be
> extended to 14.04. Also we don't need to add PATCH version as 12.04.2
> is equivalent to
> 12.04
>
> c. There is no documentation how to install fpb from github master branch.
> It's very useful for developers who want to use latest version. We
> should add something
>
> 2. Github repository [2] is messed up
>
> a. We are doing the same mistake putting all things into one basket.
> There should be 2 repositories. One for examples and one for fpb.
> What's the goal of keeping fpb in directory and examples on top? This
> breaks a couple of things
>
> b. I cannot build fpm with simple
>
> pip install git+https://
>
> Instead I am forced to do
>
> git clone https://
>
> cd fuel-plugins
>
> pip install .
>
>
>
> c. There is no tags as I can see only stable/6.0
>
> d. There are no tests to improve code quality pep8 flask8, code
> coverage
>
> e. Repository doesn't follow community standards.
>
>
>
> 3. Setting tab
>
> When plugin is installed, it's very hard to find in. In setting tab
> it's somewhere between A and Z
>
> How is user supposed to find it? There should be a separator between
> Core features and plugins. User must easily find, configure,
> enable/disable them.
>
> P.S. I am asking everyone to add own concerns so we'll be able to make
> a plan how to address them.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Fuel/Plugins#Installation
> [2] https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-plugins
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergii Golovatiuk,
> Skype #golserge
> IRC #holser
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ____ 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
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ____ 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
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ____ 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
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ____ 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
>

__________________________________________________________________________
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