[openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Wed Jun 3 20:30:17 UTC 2015

On 06/03/2015 12:08 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
> On 06/03/2015 07:22 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> However, talking with James Page (from Canonical, head of their server
>> team which does the OpenStack packaging), we believe it's best if we had
>> 2 different distinct teams: one for Fedora/SuSe/everything-rpm, and one
>> for Debian based distribution.
>> We could try to work as a single entity (RPM + deb teams), but rpm+yum
>> and dpkg+apt are 2 distinct worlds which have very few common
>> attributes. So even if it may socially be nice, it's not the right
>> technical decision.
> Taking a step back, even though the tooling and packaging formats are
> different, it is a massive benefit to OpenStack and to operators if the
> end result of installing OpenStack packages on any distro is as similar
> as possible. To that end, this should be one unified packaging team
> focused on delivering a usable OpenStack through the distros.

So wouldn't that be more of an arguement to move as much of the
installation logic back into the python packages as possible.

So that "pip install nova" was a thing that you could do, and get
reasonable results, and then the packaging teams would work around
bundling that and handling dependencies sanely for their platforms.

The closer we can get logic about what a service should look like on
disk back into that service itself, the less work duplicated by any of
the installers, and the more common OpenStack envs would be. The fact
that every installer / package needs to copy in a bunch of etc files
(because the python packages don't do it) has always seemed rather odd
to me.


Sean Dague

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list