Open Stack

Excerpts from gordon chung's message of 2017-04-20 17:12:26 +0000:
> 
> On 20/04/17 01:32 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote:
> > Wasn't there also some decision made in austin (?) about how we as a
> > group stated something along the line of co-installability isn't as
> > important as it once was (and may not even be practical or what people
> > care about anymore anyway)?

I don't remember that, but I may not have been in the room at the
time.  In the past when we've discussed that idea, we've continued
to maintain that co-installability is still needed for distributors
who have packaging constraints that require it and for use cases
like single-node deployments for POCs.

> > With kolla becoming more popular (tripleo I think is using it, and ...)
> > and the containers it creates making isolated per-application
> > environments it makes me wonder what of global-requirements is still
> > valid (as a concept) and what isn't.

We still need to review dependencies for license compatibility, to
minimize redundancy, and to ensure that we're not adding things to
the list that are not being maintained upstream. Even if we stop syncing
versions, official projects need to be those reviews, and having the
global list is a way to ensure that the reviews are done.

> > I do remember the days of free for all requirements (or requirements
> > sometimes just put/stashed in devstack vs elsewhere), which I don't
> > really want to go back to; but if we finally all agree that
> > co-installability isn't what people actually do and/or care about
> > (anymore?) then maybe we can re-think some things?
> 
> agree with all of ^... but i imagine to make progress on this, we'd have 
> to change/drop devstack usage in gate and that will take forever and a 
> lifetime (is that a chick flick title?) given how embedded devstack is 
> in everything. it seems like the solution starts with devstack.
> 
> cheers,
>