[rdo-list] Python-shade in RDO

[Haïkel]

2016-08-25 15:02 GMT+02:00 David Moreau Simard <dms at redhat.com>:
> There is a configuration management SIG in CentOS, right ?
>
> Given that they already are packaging Ansible (maybe? Didn't check..) they
> might be inclined to carry shade since it's a core plugin dependency.
>

Shade is useless without OpenStack clients ...


> David Moreau Simard
> Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO
>
> dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]
>
>
> On Aug 25, 2016 8:11 AM, "Haïkel" <hguemar at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> 2016-08-25 11:17 GMT+02:00 Michael Scherer <mscherer at redhat.com>:
>> Le jeudi 25 août 2016 à 13:53 +1000, Graeme Gillies a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> A while ago there was a discussion around python-shade library and
>>> getting it into RDO. [1]
>>>
>>> It's been a few months since then, and shade is now successfully
>>> packaged and shipped as part of Fedora [2] which is great, but now I
>>> wanted to restart the conversation about how to make it available to
>>> users of CentOS/RDO.
>>>
>>> While it was suggested to get it into EPEL, I don't feel that is the
>>> best course of action simply because of the restrictive update policies
>>> of EPEL not allowing us to update it as frequently as needed, and also
>>> because python-shade depends on the python openstack clients, which are
>>> not a part of EPEL (as my understanding).
>>>
>>> The best place for us to make this package available is in RDO itself,
>>> as shade is an official Openstack big tent project, and RDOs aims to be
>>> a distribution providing packages for Openstack projects.
>>>
>>> So I just wanted to confirm with everyone and get some feedback, but
>>> unless there is any major objections, I was going to start looking at
>>> the process to get a new package into RDO, which I assume means putting
>>> a review request in to the project https://github.com/rdo-packages
>>> (though I assume a new repo needs to be created for it first).
>>
>> As shade is used by ansible for orchestration, having to hunt various
>> repositories around the centos ecosystem, all being uncoordinated and
>> upgrading at different time is gonna be likely annoying.
>>
>> That's kinda the exact things people complained years ago in the rpm
>> ecosystem, and we are just doing it again with SIGs.
>>
>> As a smooth ops, I would prefer to have EPEL as a option for shade[1].
>>
>> [1] yes, this pun is awful, no, I am not sending that email for the sake
>> of making that reference
>> --
>> Michael Scherer
>> Sysadmin, Community Infrastructure and Platform, OSAS
>>
>>
>
> As long as EPEL doesn't fix its broken policy, it's unlikely to happen.
> 1. EPEL doesn't respect any EL7 packaging standard
> 2. Updates policy is used to block major version update even when it makes
> sense
> -> Impossible to maintain OpenStack clients in that context.
> 3. While some maintainers don't even respect the said updates policy
> to push broken updates
>
> I'd rather not speak about EPEL anymore.
>
> H.
>
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rdo-list mailing list
>> rdo-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rdo-list
>>
>> To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe at redhat.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> rdo-list mailing list
> rdo-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rdo-list
>
> To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe at redhat.com
>
>