[PKG-Openstack-devel] Accepted python-eventlet 0.20.0-1 (source all) into unstable

[Thomas Goirand]

On 11/11/2017 07:36 PM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> 
> 
>     We made a deal at DebConf 17. We want move all packages in group
>     python to dpmt.
In Debconf 17, we made the deal that we want to move general purpose
packages to the DPMT, that's correct. However, we never discussed which
of the current packages were in that group, it was just done by someone
(I don't even know if it was you or Daniel).

It turns out that the classification is, in my opinion, wrong in many
ways. For example, python-cliff is there, when it really is an OpenStack
upstream software. Its repository upstream is there:

https://github.com/openstack/cliff.git

If you look at the case of Eventlet, it's used only in OpenStack. And
not just only once, but 38 times (in 38 packages both as runtime and
build dependency). So to me, it really doesn't fit the bill of being
"general purpose", and OpenStack is too dependent on it. Best is if it
can follow the OpenStack release too.

I don't understand why you "jumped" on this particular package, just to
change team, and do other types of cosmetic changes. I would have very
much preferred if you tried to do what I'm doing right now: upgrading to
the version matching the upper-constraints.txt file (ie: 0.20.0), and
fix the Python 2.7 issues that it brings (yes, Eventlet has switched
some of its code to Python 3 only). I would have very much preferred if
you took some other less key packages, like falcon, all the
python-nose*, and many others (see below).

If we forgot to discuss what the definition of packages that needs to
move to DPMT, then we may have this discussion now. To me, packages that
can be moved to DPMT should be:

- Used by other packages, or at least usefull for other packages, not
just only by OpenStack.
- Not having OpenStack as upstream.

So to me, here's a quick list of things that IMO shouldn't be in that
"python" group ready to leave for DPMT. I marked with "u" packages for
which OpenStack is upstream, marked with "+" when used extensively and
only in OpenStack packages:

- migrate (u+)
- python-cliff (u+)
- python-cloudfiles (used exclusively for swift / ftpcloudfs)
- python-cotyledon (u+)
- python-django-openstack-auth (u+)
- python-dogpile.cache (u+)
- python-eventlet (+)
- python-extras (u+)
- python-gabbi (+)
- python-jsonpatch (+)
- python-json-pointer (used only by/for python-jsonpatch)
- python-jsonpath-rw (+)
- python-jsonpath-rw-ext (u+)
- python-jsonschema (used by 36 packages, 8 only aren't OpenStack)
- python-monotonic (13 OpenStack, 1 non-related reverse (build-)depends)
- python-pecan (+)
- python-pydot-ng / pydotplus (u+)
- python-pyghmi (u+)
- python-pysaml2
- python-rtslib-fb (u+)
- python-warlock (u+)
- python-wsme (+)

(please be constructive, and do not attempt to take a particular example
to prove me wrong, like for example with python-dogpile.cache that yes,
is also used by python-subliminal that is not OpenStack related, but
still, the general idea is there...)

Also, a list of packages from that group, IMO should be RM from Debian:
- python-coffin (no reverse (build-)depends anymore)
- python-colander (no reverse (build-)depends anymore)

I also believe a number of testing packages should be worked out in a
specific team:
- subunit
- testresources
- linecache2
- traceback2
- unittest2
- mock
- fixtures
- testtools
- testrepository

These are all packages from the testing-cabal group in github and other
testing tools, and should IMO be dealt with as a whole. Currently, these
aren't in a single team, and that needs to change. I don't mind what
team, but the current situation where we have a single maintainer for
some the above is very suboptimal.

In general, for all other packages, I have a less strong feeling, though
probably their use should be audited too. I'm 100% sure some should be
moved to DPMT ASAP, like for example all the nose plugins. Though I'm
also quite sure that some of the packages not listed above will have no
contributors but myself, so I don't really see the point. For example:

- python-happybase
- python-hp3parclient
- python-hpleftheandclient
- python-ibm-db-sa
- python-django-* (these are used by horizon only...)
- etc.

>     You promised that you will not revert this kind of
>     migration (pybuild, dpmt). And I am comaintaner so we need to talk
>     about this critical changes before.

IMO, we should have talked about moving such a package like eventlet
under DPMT. Because it doesn't make sense at all. If you think
otherwise, and believe there's points of argumentation we haven't
discussed, then by all means, let's start a thread... without threats!

>     You didn't asked me if I am fine
>     with migration back and I don't agree with it.

I did, on IRC, and I'm ok to discuss it more, there or in this list.

>     Revert this upload or I will quit openstack team.

Oh... (shocked!). Are you sure it's the way to deal with things? I would
very much prefer if you calm down, and just discuss before this type of
message. If you do leave, I'll miss you, and others probably too. But I
wont act under this type of pressure, blackmailing others is *not* the
way to solve issues, or to discuss what you feel is a problem.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)