Open Stack

On 09/25/2015 03:15 PM, John Griffith wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
> 
> So I've been kinda busy on IRC today with conversations about some patches
> I proposed yesterday [1], [2].
> 
> I thought maybe I should try and explain my actions a bit, because it seems
> that some think I just arbitrarily flew off the handle and proposed
> something drastic, or that I had some malicious intent here.
> 
> This all started when this bug [3] was submitted against Cinder and
> Manilla.  So I took at look at the review that merged this ([4]), and sure
> enough that should not have merged due to the licensing issue.
> 
> At that point I discussed the issue publicly on IRC in the openstack-dev
> channel and asked for some guidance/input from others [5].  Note as the log
> continues there were violation discoveries on top of the fact that we don't
> usually do proprietary libs in OpenStack. I reached out to a few NetApp
> folks on the Cinder channel in IRC but was unable to get any real response
> other than "I can't really talk about that", so I attempted to revert the
> library patch myself.  This however proved to be difficult due to the high
> volume of changes that have merged since the original patch landed.
> 
> I took it upon myself to attempt to fix the merge conflicts myself, however
> this proved to be a rather large task, and frankly I am not familiar enough
> with the NetApp code to be making such a large change and "hoping" that I
> got it correct.  I again stated this via IRC to a number of people.  After
> spending well over an hour working on merge conflicts in the NetApp code,
> and having the only response form NetApp developers be "I can't say
> anything about that", I then decided that the alternative was to propose
> removal of the NetApp drivers altogether which I proposed here [7].
> 
> It seems that there are folks that have taken quite a bit of offense to
> this, and are more than mildly upset with me.  To them I apologize if this
> upset you.  I will say however that given the same situation and timing, I
> would do the same thing again.  I'm a bit offended that there are
> accusations that I'm intentionally doing something against NetApp (or any
> Vendor here).  I won't even dignify the comments by responding, I'll just
> let my contributions and involvement in the community speak for itself.
> 
> The good news is that as of this morning a NetApp developer has in fact
> worked on the revert patch and fixed the merge conflicts (which I've now
> spent a fair amount of time this afternoon reviewing), and as soon as that
> merges I will propose a backport to stable/liberty.
> 
> Thanks,
> John
> 
> [1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/227427/
> [2]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/227524/
> [3]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1499334
> [4]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/215700/
> [5]:
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-dev/%23openstack-dev.2015-09-24.log.html#t2015-09-24T16:56:50
> [6]:
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-dev/%23openstack-dev.2015-09-24.log.html#t2015-09-24T19:28:33
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

Thank you John, for a through description of your actions with links for
reference.

Open source software only remains open if we all work hard to understand
what the means and act accordingly.

I value your actions in this regard to bring something questionable to
light, to ask advice of others, to speak publicly about it and to step
forward so the greater community can see the facts for themselves.

Thank you, John, I support this kind of behaviour.

I am additionally grateful for those working hard to rectify the matter.

Thank you,
Anita.