Open Stack

 ---- On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 19:54:45 -0800  Takashi Kajinami  wrote --- 
 > 
 > 
 > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:38 AM Yasufumi Ogawa yasufum.o at gmail.com> wrote:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > On 2023/02/27 10:51, Takashi Kajinami wrote:
 > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 5:18 AM Ghanshyam Mann gmann at ghanshyammann.com>
 > > wrote:
 > > 
 > >>   ---- On Sun, 19 Feb 2023 18:44:14 -0800  Takashi Kajinami  wrote ---
 > >>   > Hello,
 > >>   >
 > >>   > Currently tosca-parser is part of heat's governance, but the core
 > >> reviewers of this repositorydoes not contain any active heat cores while we
 > >> see multiple Tacker cores in this group.Considering the fact the project is
 > >> mainly maintained by Tacker cores, I'm wondering if we canmigrate this
 > >> repository to Tacker's governance. Most of the current heat cores are not
 > >> quitefamiliar with the codes in this repository, and if Tacker team is not
 > >> interested in maintainingthis repository then I'd propose retiring this.
 > As you mentioned, tacker still using tosca-parser and heat-translator.
 > 
 > >>
 > >> I think it makes sense and I remember its usage/maintenance by the Tacker
 > >> team since starting.
 > >> But let's wait for the Tacker team opinion and accordingly you can propose
 > >> the governance patch.
 > Although I've not joined to tacker team since starting, it might not be 
 > true because there was no cores of tosca-parser and heat-translator in 
 > tacker team. We've started to help maintenance the projects because no 
 > other active contributer.
 > 
 > >>
 > >>   >
 > >>   > Similarly, we have heat-translator project which has both heat cores
 > >> and tacker cores as itscore reviewers. IIUC this is tightly related to the
 > >> work in tosca-parser, I'm wondering it makesmore sense to move this project
 > >> to Tacker, because the requirement is mostly made fromTacker side rather
 > >> than Heat side.
 > >>
 > >> I am not sure about this and from the name, it seems like more of a heat
 > >> thing but it is not got beyond the Tosca template
 > >> conversion. Are there no users of it outside of the Tacker service? or any
 > >> request to support more template conversions than
 > >> Tosca?
 > >>
 > > 
 > > Current hea-translator supports only the TOSCA template[1].
 > > The heat-translator project can be a generic template converter by its
 > > nature but we haven't seen any interest
 > > in implementing support for different template formats.
 > > 
 > > [1]
 > > https://github.com/openstack/heat-translator/blob/master/translator/osc/v1/translate.py#L49
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > >> If no other user or use case then I think one option can be to merge it
 > >> into Tosca-parser itself and retire heat-translator.
 > >>
 > >> Opinion?
 > Hmm, as a core of tosca-parser, I'm not sure it's a good idea because it 
 > is just a parser TOSCA and independent from heat-translator. In 
 > addition, there is no experts of Heat or HOT in current tacker team 
 > actually, so it might be difficult to maintain heat-translator without 
 > any help from heat team.
 > 
 > The hea-translator project was initially created to implement a translator from TOSCA parser to HOT[1].Later tosca-parser was split out[2] but we have never increased scope of tosca-parser. So it has beenno more than the TOSCA template translator.
 > 
 > [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/heat-translator-tosca[2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/211204
 > We (Heat team) can provide help with any problems with heat, but we own no actual use case of template translation.Maintaining the heat-translator repository with tacker, which currently provides actual use cases would make more sense.This also gives the benefit that Tacker team can decide when stable branches of heat-translator should be retiredalong with the other Tacker repos.
 >  
 > By the way, may I ask what will be happened if the governance is move on 
 > to tacker? Is there any extra tasks for maintenance?
 > 
 > TC would have better (and more precise) explanation but my understanding is that - creating a release
 >  - maintaining stable branches
 >  - maintaining gate healthwould be the required tasks along with moderating dev discussion in mailing list/PTG/etc.

I think you covered all and the Core team (Tacker members)  might be already doing a few of the tasks. From the
governance perspective, tacker PTL will be the point of contact for this repo in the case repo becomes inactive or so
but it will be the project team's decision to merge/split things whatever way makes maintenance easy.

-gmann


 >  Thanks,
 > Yasufumi
 > 
 > >>
 > > 
 > > That also sounds good to me.
 > > 
 > > 
 > >> Also, correcting the email subject tag as [tc].
 > >>
 > >> -gmann
 > >>
 > >>   >
 > >>   > [1]
 > >> https://review.opendev.org/admin/groups/1f7855baf3cf14fedf72e443eef18d844bcd43fa,members[2]
 > >> https://review.opendev.org/admin/groups/66028971dcbb58add6f0e7c17ac72643c4826956,members
 > >>   > Thank you,Takashi
 > >>   >
 > >>
 > >>
 > > 
 > 
 >