Open Stack

Thanks for the feedback everyone. Lucas has submitted a patch to ironic-lib¹s README to clarify this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/319251/.

--ruby


On 2016-05-20, 8:46 AM, "Jim Rollenhagen" <jim at jimrollenhagen.com> wrote:

>On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 01:21:35PM -0700, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
>> On 05/16/2016 07:14 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Loo, Ruby <ruby.loo at intel.com> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> A patch to ironic-lib made me wonder about what is our supported usage of
>> >> ironic-lib. Or even the intent/scope of it. This patch changes a method,
>> >> Œbootable¹ parameter is removed and Œboot_flag¹ parameter is added [1].
>> >>
>> >> If this library/method is used by some out-of-tree thing (or even some
>> >> in-tree but outside of ironic), this will be a breaking change. If this
>> >> library is meant to be internal to ironic program itself, and to e.g. only
>> >> be used by ironic and IPA, then that is different. I was under the
>> >> impression that it was a library and meant to be used by whatever, no
>> >> restrictions on what that whatever was. It would be WAY easier if we limited
>> >> this for usage by only a few specified projects.
>> >>
>> >> What do people think?
>> >>
>> > 
>> > I still believe that the ironic-lib project was designed to share code
>> > between the Ironic projects _only_. Otherwise, if it the code was
>> > supposed to be shared across multiple projects we should have put it
>> > in oslo instead.
>> 
>> I agree, and don't see a compelling reason, today, for anyone to do the work to
>> make ironic-lib into a stable library. So...
>> 
>> I think we should keep ironic-lib where it is (in ironic, not oslo) and keep the
>> scope we intended (only for use within the Ironic project group [1]).
>> 
>> We should more clearly signal that intent within the library (eg, in the README)
>> and the project description (eg. on PyPI).
>> 
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/projects.yaml#L1915
>
>+1, let's not put extra burden on ourselves at this time.
>
>// jim
>
>> 
>> 
>> my 2c,
>> Devananda
>> 
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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