[openstack-dev] [kolla] Location of Heka Lua plugins

Steven Dake (stdake) stdake at cisco.com
Mon Feb 8 13:39:37 UTC 2016

From: Eric LEMOINE <elemoine at mirantis.com<mailto:elemoine at mirantis.com>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Monday, February 8, 2016 at 12:39 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Location of Heka Lua plugins

Le 6 févr. 2016 20:39, "Steven Dake (stdake)" <stdake at cisco.com<mailto:stdake at cisco.com>> a écrit :
> On 2/5/16, 1:14 AM, "Eric LEMOINE" <elemoine at mirantis.com<mailto:elemoine at mirantis.com>> wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Jeff Peeler <jpeeler at redhat.com<mailto:jpeeler at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >I totally agree with you Jeff.
> >
> >It is to be noted that we (my team at Mirantis) want to avoid
> >duplicating our Lua plugins, as we obviously don't want to maintain
> >two sets of identical plugins.  So there are mulitple reasons for
> >creating separate packages for these plugins: a) make it easy the
> >share the plugins across different projects, b) avoid maintaining
> >multiple sets of identical plugins, and c) avoid clobbering Kolla with
> >code not directly related to Kolla - for example, would you really
> >like to see Lua tests in Kolla and run Lua tests in the Kolla gates?
> >It would indeed be best to have these plugins in the OpenStack Git
> >namespace (as Steve Dake said), but we will have to see if that's
> >possible in practice.
> >
> >Thank you all for your responses.
> Eric,
> If I read that correctly, there is some implied resistance to placing
> these LUA plugins in the openstack git namespace.  Could you enumerate the
> issues now please?

We have no problem with placing these Lua plugins in the openstack git namespace.  At this point I just don't know if others from the OpenStack community would see this as appropriate.  That's all I'm saying.

Great, then that is settled.  It was just a communication problem.  Essentially we add a repository to this file:

And add the github repo to project config.  I can handle the project config easily and the projects.yaml easily.  Lets do that after Mitaka - we have enough on our plate to deal with for Mitaka, but from a "will the community see this as appropriate" the answer is yes, this is absolutely the correct way to go about it.

The repository must be licensed with an ASL2.0 license and all contributors in the git repository must have an active signed OpenStack CLA.  If these things aren't the case, lets get started on making that happen.  Please contact me on-list if either of these cases is false.  That would mean this code couldn't go in the Kolla repository either until these problems are rectified.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160208/cf960d45/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list