Open Stack

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017, 19:47 Mikhail Fedosin <mfedosin at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/06/17 23:20 +0300, Mikhail Fedosin wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is that Glance stagnates and it's really hard to implement new
>>> features there. In two years, only one major improvement was developed
>>> (Image Import Refactoring), and no one has tested it in production yet.
>>> And
>>> this is in the heyday of the community, as you said!
>>>
>>
>> You're skipping 2 important things here:
>>
>> The first one is that focusing on the image import refactor (IIR) was a
>> community choice. It's fixing a bigger problem that requires more focus.
>> The
>> design of the feature took a couple of cycles too, not the
>> implementation. The
>> second thing is that the slow pace may also be caused by the lack of
>> contributors.
>
>
> It's exactly what I'm talking about - implementing medium-size feature
> (IIR is about 600 lines of code [1][2]) took 1 year of discussions and 1
> year for implementation of 5 full-time developers. And most importantly, it
> took all the community attention. What if we need to implement more serious
> features? How much time will it take, given that there are not so many
> developers left?
>


What I was referring to is that this is not the normal case. The IIR was a
special case, which doesn't mean implementing features is easy, as you
mentioned.

On the other hand OpenStack users have been requesting for new features for
>>> a long time: I'm talking about mutistore support, versioning of images,
>>> image slicing (like in docker), validation and conversion of uploading
>>> data
>>> and so on. And I can say that it is impossible to implement them without
>>> breaking Glance. But all this stuff is already done in Glare (multistore
>>> support is implemented partially, because modifications of glance_store
>>> are
>>> required). And if we switch OpenStack to Glare users will get these
>>> features out of the box.
>>>
>>
>> Some of these features could be implemented in Glance. As you mentioned,
>> the
>> code base is over-engineered but it could be simplified.
>
>
> Everything is possible, I know that. But at what cost?
>


Exactly! This is what I'm asking you to help me out with. I'm trying to
have a constructive discussion on the cost of this and find a sohort term
solution and then a long term one.

I don't think the current problem is caused by Glance's lack of "exciting"
>> features and I certainly don't think replacing it with Glare would be of
>> any
>> help now. It may be something we want to think about in the future (and
>> this is
>> not the first time I say this) but what you're proposing will be an
>> expensive
>> distraction from the real problem.
>
>
> And for the very last time - I don't suggest to replace Glance now or even
> in a year. At the moment, an email with the title "Glance needs help, it's
> getting critical" is enough.
> I call to think about the distant future, probably two years or near that.
> What can prevent Flavio from writing of such emails in T cycle? Bringing
> people from Nova and Cinder part-time will not work, because, as we
> discussed above, even medium-size feature requires years of dedicated work,
> and having their +1 on typo fixes... what's the benefit of that?
>

Fully agree here. What I think we need is a short term and a long term
solution. Would you agree with this?

I mentioned in my previous email that I've never been opposed to a future
transition away from Glance as soon as this happens naturally.

I understand that you're not proposing to replace Glance now. What I was
trying to understand is why you thought migratinf away from Glance in the
future would help us now.

And for the very last time - I'm here not to promote Glare. As you know, I
> will soon be involved in this project extremely mediately. I'm here to
> decide what to do with Glance next. In the original email Flavio said "So,
> before things get even worse, I'd like us to brainstorm a bit on what
> solutions/options we have now". I described in detail my personal feelings
> about the current situation in Glance for the members of TC, who are
> unfamiliar with the project.  And also I suggested one possible solution
> with Glare, maybe not the best one, but I haven't heard any other proposals
> .
>

I know you're not promoting Glare and O hope my emails are not coming
through as accusations of any kind. I'm playing the devil's advocate
because I would like us to explore the different options we have and you
proposed one.

 Instead of constructive discussion and decision making, I received a bunch
> of insults in private correspondence, accusations of betrayal and
> suggestions to drive me out of the community.
>

As you know, I was cc'd in the thread where this happened and I'm deeply
sorry it happened. As I mentioned in my reply to that thread, I know your
intentions are goos and I do not want you to go anywhere.

Let's try to solve this conflict the best way possible.


> So, should I shut up and pretend that everything is absolutely wonderful?
> If this is a way to solve problems in OpenStack, then I understand the
> reason for such email titles.
>

Absolutely not, don't shut up. I'm sad this discussion has been stressful
for you. I hope you understand that this thread is unrelated to that
private email and I'm actually interested in hearing more from you. :)

Flavio

P.S: replying from phone, sorry if the format is all wrong.


> Best,
> Mike
>
> [1]
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+project:openstack/glance+branch:master+topic:feature/image-import
> [2]
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:merged+project:openstack/glance+branch:master+topic:feature/image-import/import
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20170613/4bef7b68/attachment.html>