Open Stack

On 16-08-11 09:36 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Excerpts from Erno Kuvaja's message of 2016-08-11 13:59:54 +0100:
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
>>> Excerpts from Erno Kuvaja's message of 2016-08-11 12:26:59 +0100:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> As follow up on the mailing list discussion [0], gerrit activity
>>>> [1][2] and cinder 3rd party CI policy [3] I'd like to initiate
>>>> discussion how Cinder follows, or rather does not follow, the standard
>>>> deprecation policy [4] as the project has been tagged on the assert
>>>> page [5].
>>>>
>>>> I'm not here to argue about the justification or rightfulness of the
>>>> Cinder policy regarding the drivers with 3rd party CI. (quite frankly
>>>> I think the Cinder policy makes lots of sense and thus propose the
>>>> removal of the tag rather than change of that policy) Just stating the
>>>> obvious that the Cinder policy does not comply with the
>>>> follows-standard-deprecation and thus the tag should be removed from
>>>> Cinder.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Erno (jokke) Kuvaja
>>>>
>>>> [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-August/100717.html
>>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348032/
>>>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348042/
>>>> [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/tested-3rdParty-drivers
>>>> [4] https://governance.openstack.org/reference/tags/assert_follows-standard-deprecation.html#requirements
>>>> [5] https://governance.openstack.org/reference/tags/assert_follows-standard-deprecation.html#application-to-current-projects
>>>>
>>> Can you be more specific about what you mean? Are you saying that
>>> the policy isn't being followed because the drivers were removed
>>> without a deprecation period, or is there something else to it?
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>> Yes, that's how I see it. Cinder's own policy is that the drivers can
>> be removed without any warning to the consumers while the standard
>> deprecation policy defines quite strict lines about informing the
>> consumer of the functionality deprecation before it gets removed.
>>
>> - Erno
>>
> Those policies do seem to be in conflict. We should consider whether
> it makes sense to adjust Cinder's policy on drivers or remove the
> stable tag.
>
> I've added "[stable]" to the subject to get the stable team's input.
> I think Tony's TZ means he's likely at the end of his day already,
> by maybe some other members of the team will have something to add.
>
> Doug
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

I think Cinder's approach to removing third party drivers is to be 
commended. I consider Cinder to be the example to follow in how to 
interact with and address third party drivers and third party driver 
maintainers (or not maintainers).

I would hope other projects follow Cinder's example here, rather than 
perceive themselves as being deterred.

Thank you,
Anita.