[tc] [ironic] Promoting ironic to a top-level opendev project?

Sean Mooney smooney at redhat.com
Mon Apr 6 11:03:43 UTC 2020

On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 10:10 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> The problem is that oslo libraries are OpenStack-specific. Imagine metal3,
> for example. When building our images, we can pull (most of) regular Python
> packages from the base OS, but everything with "oslo" in its name is on us.
> It's a maintenance burden.

what distros dont ship oslo libs?

RHEL ships them via the OSP repos
CentOS ship it via RDO
Ubunutu has them in the cloud archive
SUSE also shiped them via there openstack product although sicne they are nolonger
maintaining that goign forward and moveing the k8s based cloud offerings it might be
a valid concern there.

they are also directly installable via pip.
building rpms in the first place is a mangaince burden you do not need if you are
doing containerised delivery they only add value if you are supporting non containerised
delivery via standard package manages.

so for metal3 i dont see that as a vaild argument as in your case redhat is already going
to be doing the packageing for the OSP product line irrispective of the supprot/sale
of metal3 in a product so using olso wont have any additional downstream cost.
form a distro/downstream perpective we still need to maintain the python libs so using oslo
is no larger burden the using a different pip lib that is not already packaged in rhel.

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list