[Rdo-list] Packaging the big tent (or at least part of it)

Steven Dake (stdake) stdake at cisco.com
Wed May 27 00:12:50 UTC 2015

On 5/26/15, 2:41 PM, "Steve Baker" <sbaker at redhat.com> wrote:

>On 27/05/15 09:23, Steve Gordon wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> At the community meetup, which we held in a somewhat lightning talk
>>focused format due to time constraints, we touched on the subject of
>>packaging the big tent [1] and said that if something was under
>>OpenStack governance we (as a community, not we as in Red Hat) would be
>>willing to accept it into RDO assuming somebody was willing to
>>package/maintain it.
>> Now packaging isn't really my end of things so I have to admit I
>>haven't been paying exhaustive attention to the discussion about opening
>>up the packaging infrastructure to external contributions, but I have
>>been approached by one or two people who would be interested in
>>packaging projects that have recently been added to the OpenStack
>>namespace and they either develop or maintain a key interest in. Is
>>there a quickstart I can point such potential contributors at?
>> Thanks,
>> Steve
>> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RDO_Vancouver
>Heat had a design summit session which resulted in agreeing to remove
>our contrib resources and bringing big-tent resources into the main heat
>tree. The flow on from this is that Liberty Heat will depend on many new
>python-*client projects that may not yet be packaged.
>We do have criteria for these resources coming in-tree, such as being in
>the openstack namespace, and being included in global-requirements.txt,
>but we should have some consideration for the impact this has on
>downstream packaging.
>So either we just insist that downstream package all these clients, or
>we come up with some further criteria for the in-tree resources for when
>their client imports should be optional.
>Any opinions from the RDO community would be most welcome.


Packaging a client library is at most a 1 hour job.  Testing it is another
matter however :)  The only downside I see is there has to be someone
willing to do the packaging, meaning someone has to care about the project
from an RDO perspective.  I¹m happy to take on maintainership of the
Magnum packages for RDO (not to include puppettizing them, because I am
not learning puppet;), but for your proposal to work well, we need
maintainers for all the things.

If puppet isn¹t a requirement for inclusion in RDO, then it should be
fairly easy to find volunteers in thee upstream communities to do the job.


>Rdo-list mailing list
>Rdo-list at redhat.com
>To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe at redhat.com

More information about the dev mailing list