Open Stack

So the part that worries me about what u just said is the part about "it is already some kind of official project".
When you have to question whether a project is official or not, that seems to pretty make the whole point for making it official ;)

Overall though I think what u are saying is correct, but the overhead I don't see as being a bad thing.

In my idea release management is good since it allows developers to be able to setup a development environment for a given openstack release (good for when you need to fix bugs against a given release as well as good for providing a stable point for other distributions to know what goes in a release and what configs need to be adjusted to make that release work for all the different components). So I don't see that as a drawback (even though yes it does add work/overhead in, but I don't see that as a valid point, in any case).

Downstream distribution, I am not exactly sure what you mean here?

A technical lead I think is something good to have, as this script/code/documentation is not as simple as you might think (and most likely won't get any simpler).

Maybe the correct wording isn't that this is a core project, but it seems like it is already a widely used project, so I don't see the difference, either way it should become official and follow some of the same processes as the rest of openstack. Yes it might be developer oriented but if that doesn't fit a definition of a core project (or whatever u want to call it), because of it being developer focused, then maybe the core project definition needs to be updated?

As for:

An other point is that the official CI systems (and I think everybody else, too) are using devstack.org and and that the script is doing a well job.

That's the whole point, a un-official script shouldn't be doing these tasks ;)

-Josh

On 2/6/12 12:36 PM, "Christian Berendt" <berendt at b1-systems.de> wrote:

Hello together.

> I was wondering if the community could elevate devstack to a
> "official" openstack project, instead of being a "unofficial
> project".

I think devstack.org is already some kind of official project (provided
by Rackspace Cloud Builders).

Where is the benefit of becoming a core project? At the moment I only
see a lot of overhead (release management, downstream distribution,
technical lead, feature frozen zones, ..) without any benefits.

Also it would take a lot of efforts (see [0] for details) to set up a
new core project.

Devstack is an instrument to help and improve the development. I think
a core component must have the opportunity to be used in a productive
environment and should not "only" be used to support the development.

Can you please describe in more detail what are the benefits of
becoming a core project?

An other point is that the official CI systems (and I think everybody
else, too) are using devstack.org and and that the script is doing a
well job.

You're starting two discussions in this mail: Should devstack become a
part of the core and should devstack be rewritten to Python. I think
the discussions should be splitted and I don't see any motivation of
the devstack.org developers to join the discussion of a Python rewrite
at the moment (maybe I'm wrong).

I don't find the definition and requirements of a core project at the
moment, but I'm pretty sure that there exist some documents.

Maybe it makes sense to define some kind of requirements about OpenStack
specific tools used by the official CI, but that's an other discussion.

[0] http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Approved/NewProjectProcess

Bye, Christian.

--
Christian Berendt
Linux / Unix Consultant & Developer
Mail: berendt at b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20120206/04b459ac/attachment.html>