Open Stack

On 9/14/20 10:17 AM, Gaël THEROND wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> So, thomas, your message was rude and can hurt because Yocto didn’t
> suggested to use those tools, he was answering you that he feel the pain
> as everyone is suggesting those tool when you talk with people on IRC etc.

Sorry if it was perceived as rude. Though IMO Yocto *was* suggesting
these tools, at least that's my perception in his message.

> Even if I do understand your point and know the importance of being
> autonomous and do not rely on non-FLOSS software, the thruth being all
> those discussions is the pain in the ass that it is to contribute to
> Openstack projects compared with other Open source software based on
> Github or Github like workflow.

If it's harder to contribute to OpenStack, IMO, it's not because of the
tooling (ie: gerrit + git-review), but because the bar for patch quality
is set much higher. Otherwise, I did find the git-review workflow much
nicer than the one of Gitlab / Github.

> The opensource community and especially the Openstack one need to
> understand that people really get a limited amount of time and so if you
> want to attract more people your contribution process have to be
> streamlined and on par with what most of us developers do experience on
> everyday.

I very much agree that getting a patch accepted isn't easy. I gave up
about some patches because core reviewer were asking for too much work
that I cannot unfortunately provide (I understand why they do that
though). Though this never was because of the infrastructure, which I
find much nicer than any other.

> We want a fully floss project to host it? Fine it’s perfectly valid
> argument, then just reuse what’s already there with gitea and redirect
> development effort of the abandonned software to the new platform in
> order to support the missing part if ever required!

This is IMO a much nicer idea than suggesting to go back to Launchpad,
or stop migrating to Storyboard.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)