Open Stack

IMHO it is important to keep plugin examples and keep testing them, very
valuable for plugin developers.

For example, I've encountered [0] the case where "plugin as role" feature
wasn't easily testable with fuel-qa because not compliant with the last
plugin data structure,
and more recently we've spotted a regression [1] with "vip-reservation"
feature introduced by a change in nailgun.
These kind of issues are time consuming for plugin developers and can/must
be avoided by testing them.

I don't even understand why the question is raised while fuel plugins are
supposed to be supported and more and more used [3], even by murano [4] ...

[0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1543962
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1551320
[3]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/085636.html
[4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/286310/

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <mmosesohn at mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Hi Fuelers,
>
> I would like to bring your attention a dilemma we have here. It seems
> that there is a dispute as to whether we should maintain the releases
> list for example plugins[0]. In this case, this is for adding version
> 9.0 to the list.
>
> Right now, we run a swarm test that tries to install the example
> plugin and do a deployment, but it's failing only for this reason. I
> should add that this is the only automated daily test that will verify
> that our plugin framework actually works. During the Mitaka
> development  cycle, we already had an extended period where plugins
> were broken[1]. Removing this test (or leaving it permanently red,
> which is effectively the same), would raise the risk to any member of
> the Fuel community who depends on plugins actually working.
>
> The other impact of abandoning maintenance of example plugins is that
> it means that a given interested Fuel Plugin developer would not be
> able to easily get started with plugin development. It might not be
> inherently obvious to add the current Fuel release to the
> metadata.yaml file and it would likely discourage such a user. In this
> case, I would propose that we remove example plugins from fuel-plugins
> GIT repo if they are not maintained. Non-functioning code is worse
> than deleted code in my opinion.
>
> Please share your opinions and let's decide which way to go with this
> bug[2]
>
> [0] https://github.com/openstack/fuel-plugins/tree/master/examples
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1544505
> [2] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1548340
>
> Best Regards,
> Matthew Mosesohn
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160303/311e7353/attachment.html>