Open Stack

Thanks for the quick feedback everyone. I've abandoned the patch series, 
although I did pull out one change that seemed to be a valid bugfix 
independent of the migrator work: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/607690/

On 1/10/19 9:15 AM, Herve Beraud wrote:
> Make sense so +1
> 
> Le jeu. 10 janv. 2019 14:27, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com 
> <mailto:doug at doughellmann.com>> a écrit :
> 
>     "Nguyen Hung, Phuong" <phuongnh at vn.fujitsu.com
>     <mailto: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
>     <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
>     <mailto: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>
>     <mailto: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
>