Open Stack

Hi,

Plugin examples mustn't be removed, those plugins are part of integration
tests for fuel plugin builder, which should be able to build any version of
plugin.

So there are two ways to solve the problem:
1. Before test run update compatibility matrix for plugins automatically.
2. Continue fixing plugin examples.

We may try to do 2nd automatically (proposing a patch with fixed version)
on version change in openstack.yaml.

Thanks,

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Anastasia Urlapova <aurlapova at mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Igor,
> I agree with folks, that we have to fix plugin. You didn't mention any
> real reasons, why we should change workflow with example-plugin right now
> in the middle of release. If we are keeping support of the example plugin
> in 9.0 it should work from box w/o any black magic in other places.
>
>
> Nastya.
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Simon Pasquier <spasquier at mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yet another example [1] of why a dummy/example plugin should be
>> integrated in the Fuel CI process: the current version of Fuel is broken
>> for (almost) all plugins since a week at least and no one noticed.
>> Regards,
>> Simon
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1554095
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Simon Pasquier <spasquier at mirantis.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What about maintaining a dummy plugin (eg running only one or two very
>>> simple tasks) as a standalone project for the purpose of QA?
>>> IMO it would make more sense than having those example plugins in the
>>> fuel-plugins project...
>>> Regards,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnitsky at mirantis.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > and really lowering barriers for people who just begin create plugins.
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense. First, people usually create them via running `fpb --create
>>>> plugin-name` that generates plugin boilerplate. And that boilerplate
>>>> won't contain that changes.
>>>>
>>>> Second, if people ain't smart enough to change few lines in
>>>> `metadata.yaml` of generated boilerplate to make it work with latest
>>>> Fuel, maybe it's better for them to do not develop plugins at all?
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Stanislaw Bogatkin
>>>> <sbogatkin at mirantis.com> wrote:
>>>> > +1 to maintain example plugins. It is easy enough and really lowering
>>>> > barriers for people who just begin create plugins.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Matthew Mosesohn <
>>>> mmosesohn at mirantis.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Igor,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It seems you are proposing an IKEA approach to plugins. Take Fuel's
>>>> >> example plugin, add in the current Fuel release, and then build it.
>>>> We
>>>> >> maintained these plugins in the past, but now it should a manual step
>>>> >> to test it out on the current release.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What would be a more ideal situation that meets the needs of users
>>>> and
>>>> >> QA? Right now we have failed tests until we can decide on a solution
>>>> >> that works for everybody.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>>>> ikalnitsky at mirantis.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >> > No, this is a wrong road to go.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > What if in Fuel 10 we drop v1 plugins support? What should we do?
>>>> >> > Remove v1 example from source tree? That doesn't seem good to me.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Example plugins are only examples. The list of supported releases
>>>> must
>>>> >> > be maintained on system test side, and system tests must inject
>>>> that
>>>> >> > information into plugin's metadata.yaml and test it.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Again, I don't say we shouldn't test plugins. I say, tests should
>>>> be
>>>> >> > responsible for preparing plugins. I can say even more: tests
>>>> should
>>>> >> > not rely on what is produced by plugins, since it's something that
>>>> >> > could be changed and tests start failing.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Swann Croiset <
>>>> scroiset at mirantis.com>
>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>> >> >> 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
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> >> 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
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> > 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
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> >> 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
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > with best regards,
>>>> > Stan.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20160309/5adaf10b/attachment.html>