Open Stack

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:00 AM, James E. Blair <corvus at inaugust.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jenkins Job builder is one of our more widely used projects.  It has
> served us extremely well and a lot of other projects have found it to be
> very useful.  Many of us are delighted and very proud of this.
>
> Recently I have proposed substantial changes to Zuul that I hope will,
> through the process of simplification, mean that we will eventually no
> longer need to use JJB in the OpenStack project.  However, I believe the
> project will continue to be useful for many others.  Meanwhile, others
> within the JJB community have started proposing major changes to JJB as
> well.  I wanted to talk about how development might proceed in order to
> provide minimal disruption for everyone.
>
> First, I think JJB should continue to at least maintain (and perhaps
> enhance) the current use case and syntax we are using in the OpenStack
> project infrastructure.  If major changes are to happen to JJB, I do not
> anticipate that we will want to make use of them in OpenStack, so we
> will be a good use case to ensure that we do not break compatibility for
> JJB's existing user base.

+1

We should take this one step further and be careful even in cases
where project-config isn't affected by changes. Some of the changes
being discussed in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/194497/ would
definitely have an adverse effect on the configuration I currently
manage.

>
> Having said that, if the Infrastructure Council, including the current
> JJB cores, feel that the proposed major changes to JJB are desirable, it
> will approve the proposed specs, and those changes can proceed.  If the
> changes need to break backwards compatibility, we can create a feature
> branch for that work (or a stable branch) so that we can continue to
> support the current 1.0 syntax (however, if we can evolve JJB in one
> branch, all the better).

What about API-specific changes that don't affect DSL or command line behavior?

Initially I was thinking that would happen on a feature branch but I'm
not sure how beneficial that would be at this point.

>
> Finally, assuming that we do accept the Zuulv3 spec and stop using JJB
> ourselves, I would expect us to remove JJB from the list of official
> OpenStack infrastructure projects, but owing to our responsibility to
> the community that has built up around it and our desire for its
> continued success, continue hosting development in OpenStack's project
> infrastructure as long as we are able and the future JJB development
> team desires.

+1, I'd like to help maintain this however I can.

>
> I hope that this sounds like a clear plan that benefits everyone.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-Infra mailing list
> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra