[PKG-Openstack-devel] Cooperation in adding Manila to Debian

[Thomas Goirand]

On 04/17/2015 03:41 PM, James Page wrote:
> And finally, I'd also like to take the opportunity to respond to
> Thomas' immediate flame of everything/everybody Canonical when you
> sent your email.

James,

I fail to see where I've done "immediate flame of everything/everybody 
Canonical". Re-read, and you'll see I haven't.

> Thomas and my team have divergent views on what should be done in the
> packaging for OpenStack, and despite numerous efforts over the last
> few years, we've never managed to align on those views sufficiently to
> enable any direct collaboration.

You know that technicality is not the main issue. I've tried to avoid 
discussing it publicly because I still have hope the situation may 
change one day. But it is very clear that Mark doesn't want Canonical's 
team to merge the work with the one in Debian for commercial reasons.

If this has changed, please have Mark state it clearly, then maybe we 
can sit again together at the next Vancouver summit, and find solutions 
to work together.

> My teams choice of VCS system is also perceived as a blocker to
> collaboration, despite the fact we've had an effective flow of
> collaboration between Ubuntu and Debian since Ubuntu was setup via
> source packages, patches and bugs (see [0] - I've made over 650
> contributions back to Debian via this process).

I don't think the VCS is the main issue here. However, I can't let the 
above without a reply.

Regarding BZR, there's 3 sets of people:
- The ones working for Canonical.
- The ones who don't know BZR.
- And the ones who don't work for Canonical, know BZR, and hates it.

The world is using Git. I mean it: everyone! Including upstream 
OpenStack. There's no way Canonical can impose BZR to everyone indeed.

Therefore, using BZR would be another barrier for contribution in the 
OpenStack packages in Debian.

BTW, I do understand that you don't want to re-do all of your tooling, 
as you already explained to me in Paris. But yes, since git is the 
de-facto VCS for everyone (including in Debian), it is very problematic 
as we can't work directly on the same sources through a VCS.

> I'd encourage you to ensure that the work you do on Manila is
> consumable by any Debian or Ubuntu developer via the source package
> format - don't assume that whomever is working on the package is
> working in git. This makes life a whole lot easier in a world where
> we don't all use the same VCS.

All of the packages maintained in Debian are fully usable in Ubuntu 
after rebuild. There's things like this for example, in Ceilometer's 
postinst:

         if dpkg-vendor --derives-from ubuntu ; then
                 LIBVIRT_GROUP=libvirtd
         else
                 LIBVIRT_GROUP=libvirt
         fi

If one day we can manage to work together on the core packages, then 
this is the kind of things I'd like to see in the Ubuntu packages too.

> The work we do in Ubuntu is always consumable back into Debian via the
> same process (source packages).

See what you are writing: you want Debian to "consume" your work, not to 
collaborate. This is basically what you've done for the Juno cycle, and 
you're proposing that we do the same on the Debian side. So I really was 
stating a fact in my reply, when telling you don't want collaboration. I 
wasn't flaming.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)