Open Stack

On 23/05/18 11:25, Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Julia Kreger
> <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There is definitely value to be gained for both projects in terms of a
>> different point of view that might not have been able to play out in
> 
> Ironic is a bit different in this regard to the released code since
> there _is_ overlap with the STX Bare Metal service.  There is also
> not-overlapping aspects to it.  I would like to talk with you and the
> Ironic team at some point about scope and goals for the long term.
> 
>> the public community, but since we're dealing with squashed commits of
>> changes, it is really hard for us to delineate history/origin of code
>> fragments, and without that it makes it near impossible for projects
>> to even help them reconcile their technical debt because of that and
>> the lacking context surrounding that. It would be so much more
>> friendly to the community if we had stacks of patch files that we
>> could work with git.

+1

> Unfortunately it was a requirement to not release the history.  There
> are some bits that we were not allowed to release (for legal reasons,
> not open core reasons) that are present in the history.  And yes it is
> in most cases unusable to do anything more than browse for pulling
> things upstream.

'git filter-branch' is your friend :)

> What I did manage to get was permission to publish the individual
> commits on top of the upstream base that do not run afoul of the legal
> issues.  Given that this is all against Pike and we need to propose to
> master first, they are not likely directly usable but the information
> needed for the upstream work will be available.  These have not been
> cleaned up yet but I plan to add them directly to the repos containing
> the squashes as they are done.
> 
>> Can I add myself to the list of confused people wanting to understand
>> better? I can see and understand value, but context and understanding
>> as to why as I mentioned above is going to be the main limiter for
>> interaction.
> 
> I have heard multiple reasons why this has been done, this is one area
> I am not going to go into detail about other than the stuff that has
> been cleared and released.  Understanding (some) business decisions
> are not one of my strengths.
> 
> I will say that my opinion from working with WRS for a few months is
> they do truly want to form a community around StarlingX and will be
> moving their ongoing Titanium development there.
> 
> dt
>