Open Stack

Yup but that didn't happen with kolla-mesos and I didn't catch it until 2
weeks after it was locked in stone.  At that point I asked for the ABI to
be unified to which I got a "shrug" and no action.

If it has been in one repo, everyone would have seen the multiple ABIs and
rejected the patch in the first place.

FWIW I am totally open to extending the ABI however is necessary to make
Kolla containers be the reference that other projects use for their
container deployment technology tooling.  In this case the ABI was
extended without consultation and without repair after the problem was
noticed.

Regards
-steve

On 5/2/16, 12:04 PM, "Fox, Kevin M" <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:

>+1 to one set of containers for all. If kolla-k8s needs tweaks to the
>abi, the request should go to the kolla core team (involving everyone)
>and discuss why they are needed/reasonable. This should be done
>regardless of if there are 1or 2 repo's in the end.
>
>Thanks,
>Kevin
>________________________________________
>From: Steven Dake (stdake) [stdake at cisco.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:14 AM
>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two
>
>I personally would like to see one set of defaults files for the default
>config and merging thereof. (the stuff in roles/*/defaults).
>
>There would be overlap there.
>
>A lot of the overlap involves things like reno, sphinx, documentation,
>gating, etc.
>
>During kolla-emsos, separate containers (IIRC) were made, separate start
>extension scripts were made, and to my dismay a completely different ABI
>was implemented.
>
>We need one ABI to the containers and that should be laid out in the spec
>if it isn't already.
>
>Regards
>-steve
>
>
>On 5/2/16, 10:31 AM, "Ryan Hallisey" <rhallise at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>Most of the code is not an overlap. We will preserve the ABI while
>>customizing the ansible config generation (if we do end up using it). We
>>can use some of what's in kolla as a starting point.
>>
>>I'd say the code overlap is a bootstrapping point for the project.
>>
>>-Ryan
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Kevin M Fox" <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov>
>>To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>><openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>>Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 12:56:22 PM
>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two
>>
>>One thing we didn't talk about too much at the summit is the part of the
>>spec that says we will reuse a bunch of ansible stuff to generate configs
>>for the k8s case...
>>
>>Do we believe that code would be minimal and not impact separate repo's
>>much or is the majority of the work in the end going to be focused there?
>>If most of the code ends up landing there, then its probably not worth
>>splitting?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Kevin
>>________________________________________
>>From: Steven Dake (stdake) [stdake at cisco.com]
>>Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 6:05 AM
>>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two
>>
>>On 5/1/16, 10:32 PM, "Swapnil Kulkarni" <me at coolsvap.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Britt Houser (bhouser)
>>><bhouser at cisco.com> wrote:
>>>> Although it seems I'm in the minority, I am in favor of unified repo.
>>>>
>>>> From: "Steven Dake (stdake)" <stdake at cisco.com>
>>>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>>>>questions)"
>>>> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> Date: Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM
>>>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>>>> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>>>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two
>>>>
>>>> Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal
>>>>9am
>>>> morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate
>>>> repository.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think a separate repository is the correct approach based upon
>>>>one
>>>> off private conversations with folks at summit.  Many people from that
>>>>list
>>>> approached me and indicated they would like to see the work integrated
>>>>in
>>>> one repository as outlined in my vote proposal email.  The reasons I
>>>>heard
>>>> were:
>>>>
>>>> Better integration of the community
>>>> Better integration of the code base
>>>> Doesn't present an us vs them mentality that one could argue happened
>>>>during
>>>> kolla-mesos
>>>> A second repository makes k8s a second class citizen deployment
>>>>architecture
>>>> without a voice in the full deployment methodology
>>>> Two gating methods versus one
>>>> No going back to a unified repository while preserving git history
>>>>
>>>> I favor of the separate repositories I heard
>>>>
>>>> It presents a unified workspace for kubernetes alone
>>>> Packaging without ansible is simpler as the ansible directory need not
>>>>be
>>>> deleted
>>>>
>>>> There were other complaints but not many pros.  Unfortunately I failed
>>>>to
>>>> communicate these complaints to the core team prior to the vote, so
>>>>now
>>>>is
>>>> the time for fixing that.
>>>>
>>>> I'll leave it open to the new folks that want to do the work if they
>>>>want to
>>>> work on an offshoot repository and open us up to the possible problems
>>>> above.
>>>>
>>>> If you are on this list:
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Hallisey
>>>> Britt Houser
>>>>
>>>> mark casey
>>>>
>>>> Steven Dake (delta-alpha-kilo-echo)
>>>>
>>>> Michael Schmidt
>>>>
>>>> Marian Schwarz
>>>>
>>>> Andrew Battye
>>>>
>>>> Kevin Fox (kfox1111)
>>>>
>>>> Sidharth Surana (ssurana)
>>>>
>>>>  Michal Rostecki (mrostecki)
>>>>
>>>>   Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap)
>>>>
>>>>   MD NADEEM (mail2nadeem92)
>>>>
>>>>   Vikram Hosakote (vhosakot)
>>>>
>>>>   Jeff Peeler (jpeeler)
>>>>
>>>>   Martin Andre (mandre)
>>>>
>>>>   Ian Main (Slower)
>>>>
>>>> Hui Kang (huikang)
>>>>
>>>> Serguei Bezverkhi (sbezverk)
>>>>
>>>> Alex Polvi (polvi)
>>>>
>>>> Rob Mason
>>>>
>>>> Alicja Kwasniewska
>>>>
>>>> sean mooney (sean-k-mooney)
>>>>
>>>> Keith Byrne (kbyrne)
>>>>
>>>> Zdenek Janda (xdeu)
>>>>
>>>> Brandon Jozsa (v1k0d3n)
>>>>
>>>> Rajath Agasthya (rajathagasthya)
>>>> Jinay Vora
>>>> Hui Kang
>>>> Davanum Srinivas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please speak up if you are in favor of a separate repository or a
>>>>unified
>>>> repository.
>>>>
>>>> The core reviewers will still take responsibility for determining if
>>>>we
>>>> proceed on the action of implementing kubernetes in general.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>> -steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________________________________
>>>>_
>>>>_
>>>>_
>>>> 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 am in the favor of having two separate repos and evaluating the
>>>merge/split option later.
>>>Though in the longer run, I would recommend having a single repo with
>>>multiple stable deployment tools(maybe too early to comment views but
>>>yeah)
>>>
>>>Swapnil
>>
>>Swapnil,
>>
>>I gather this is what people want but this cannot be done with git and
>>maintain history.  To do this, we would have to "cp oldrepo/files to
>>newrepo/files" and the git history would be lost.  That is why choosing
>>two repositories up front is irreversible.
>>
>>Regards
>>-steve
>>
>>>
>>>________________________________________________________________________
>>>_
>>>_
>>>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
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>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