[openstack-dev] The end of OpenStack packages in Debian?
doug at doughellmann.com
Tue Feb 21 04:06:07 UTC 2017
Excerpts from Thomas Goirand's message of 2017-02-21 00:50:35 +0100:
> On 02/19/2017 08:43 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > Excerpts from Thomas Goirand's message of 2017-02-19 00:58:01 +0100:
> >> On 02/18/2017 07:59 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> >>> Indeed, DPMT uses all the worst choices for maintaining most of the
> >>> python module packages in Debian. However, something will need to be
> >>> done to spread the load of maintaining the essential libraries, and the
> >>> usual answer to that for Python libraries is DPMT.
> >> I wish the Python team was more like the Perl one, who really is a well
> >> functioning with a strong team spirit and commitment, with a sense of
> >> collective responsibility. It's far from being the case in the DPMT.
> >> Moving packages to the DPMT will not magically get you new maintainers.
> >> Even within the team, there's unfortunately *a lot* of strong package
> >> ownership.
> > Whatever the issues are with that team, there's a _mountain_ of packages
> > to maintain, and only one team whose charter is to maintain python
> > modules. So we're going to have to deal with the shortcomings of that
> > relationship, or find more OpenStack specific maintainers.
> I think there's a misunderstanding here. What I wrote is that the DPMT
> will *not* maintain packages just because they are pushed to the team,
> you will need to find maintainers for them. So that's the last option of
> your last sentence above that would work. The only issue is, nobody
> cared so far...
> > It's also important that the generic libraries
> > we maintain, like stevedore, remain up to date in Debian so they don't
> > fall out of favor with users. Nothing kills a library like old versions
> > breaking apps.
> Stevedore is a very good example. It build-depends on oslotest (to run
> unit tests), which itself needs os-client-config, oslo.config, which
> itself ... no need to continue, once you need oslo.config, you need
It sounds like we've broken our dependency cycle rule for some of
the libraries. I'll take a look at what can be done about that over
> everything else. So to continue to package something like Stevedore, we
> need nearly the full stack. That's equivalent to maintaining all of
> OpenStack (as I wrote: the cherry on top of the cake is the services,
> the bulk work is the Python modules).
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
More information about the OpenStack-dev