Open Stack

Make sense so +1

Le jeu. 10 janv. 2019 14:27, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> a écrit :

> "Nguyen Hung, Phuong" <phuongnh at vn.fujitsu.com> writes:
>
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> >> I suggest that we either WIP or abandon the current
> >> patch series.
> > ...
> >> If you have any thoughts about this plan please let me know. Otherwise
> I
> >> will act on it sometime in the near-ish future.
> >
> > Thanks for your consideration. I am agree with you, please help me to
> abandon them because I am not privileged with those patches.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Phuong.
>
> +1 for abandoning them, at least for now. As Ben points out, gerrit will
> still have copies.
>
> Doug
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Nemec [mailto:openstack at nemebean.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 6:12 AM
> > To: Herve Beraud; Nguyen, Hung Phuong
> > Cc: openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [oslo][migrator] RFE Configuration mapping tool for upgrade
> - coordinate teams
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/20/18 4:41 AM, Herve Beraud wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Le jeu. 20 déc. 2018 à 09:26, Nguyen Hung, Phuong
> >> <phuongnh at vn.fujitsu.com <mailto:phuongnh at vn.fujitsu.com>> a écrit :
> >>
> >>     Hi Ben,
> >>
> >>     I am apology that in last month we do not have much time maintaining
> >>     the code.
> >>
> >>      > but if no one's going to use it then I'd rather cut our
> >>      > losses than continue pouring time into it.
> >>
> >>     I agree, we will wait for the community to decide the need for the
> >>     feature.
> >>     In the near future, we do not have ability to maintain the code. If
> >>     anyone
> >>     has interest to continue maintaining the patch, we will support with
> >>     document,
> >>     reviewing... in our possibility.
> >>
> >>
> >> I can help you to maintain the code if needed.
> >>
> >> Personaly I doesn't need this feature so I agree Ben and Doug point of
> view.
> >>
> >> We need to measure how many this feature is useful and if it make sense
> >> to support and maintain more code in the future related to this feature
> >> without any usages behind that.
> >
> > We discussed this again in the Oslo meeting this week, and to share with
> > the wider audience here's what I propose:
> >
> > Since the team that initially proposed the feature and that we expected
> > to help maintain it are no longer able to do so, and it's not clear to
> > the Oslo team that there is sufficient demand for a rather complex
> > feature like this, I suggest that we either WIP or abandon the current
> > patch series. Gerrit never forgets, so if at some point there are
> > contributors (new or old) who have a vested interest in the feature we
> > can always resurrect it.
> >
> > If you have any thoughts about this plan please let me know. Otherwise I
> > will act on it sometime in the near-ish future.
> >
> > In the meantime, if anyone is desperate for Oslo work to do here are a
> > few things that have been lingering on my todo list:
> >
> > * We have a unit test in oslo.utils (test_excutils) that is still using
> > mox. That needs to be migrated to mock.
> > * oslo.cookiecutter has a number of things that are out of date (doc
> > layout, lack of reno, coverage job). Since it's unlikely we've reached
> > peak Oslo library we should update that so there aren't a bunch of
> > post-creation changes needed like there were with oslo.upgradecheck (and
> > I'm guessing oslo.limit).
> > * The config validator still needs support for dynamic groups, if
> > oslo.config is your thing.
> > * There are 326 bugs open across Oslo projects. Help wanted. :-)
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Ben
> >
>
> --
> Doug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190110/6e601bca/attachment-0001.html>