[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [rdo-list] Python-shade in RDO

On 25/08/16 19:15, Haïkel wrote:
> 2016-08-25 5:53 GMT+02:00 Graeme Gillies <ggillies redhat com>:
>> 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).
> *nods*
>> 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).
> Likely to be rejected as shade lives in openstack-infra namespace.
> Well, we've had requests to provide a separate repository consumable
> for openstack infra
> but until now, the discussion stalled due to lack of people driving it.
> We could create an rdo-extras EL7 repository that would contain:
> * latest stable clients + SDK
> * minor utilities that are only available in EPEL (or possibly a
> separate repo if it grows too much)
> Regards,
> H.

Sorry I'm a bit confused here, are you actually saying that shade can't
be in RDO because it lives in a slightly different git repo location, a
location by which, is still referenced as perfectly valid for openstack
projects in Big tent


I'm also confused why you think the clients should also be moved out of
rdo into another repo as well. This is just splitting the repos up
needlessly isn't it? Shade, like oslo and other Openstack libraries,
should be part of RDO.

If shade was moved from the openstack-infra to the openstack git
namespace, would it be accepted then?



>> Regards,
>> Graeme
>> [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/rdo-list/2015-November/thread.html
>> [2] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=21707
>> --
>> Graeme Gillies
>> Principal Systems Administrator
>> Openstack Infrastructure
>> Red Hat Australia
>> _______________________________________________
>> rdo-list mailing list
>> rdo-list redhat com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rdo-list
>> To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe redhat com

Graeme Gillies
Principal Systems Administrator
Openstack Infrastructure
Red Hat Australia

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]