[neutron][devstack] Future of lib/neutron and lib/neutron-legacy
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 7:38 PM Brian Haley <haleyb.dev at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Slawek,
> On 12/12/19 9:06 AM, Slawek Kaplonski wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Few years ago (I donâ??t know exactly when it started as I wasnâ??t very active upstream than for sure) Neutron team started work on new neutron module for Devstack. See  for details.
> > But since then this new module is still not ready to use. For example in gate jobs we are still using lib/neutron-legacy module as this new one is always causing some problems.
> > Things in its current shape may be confusing for new Devstack users as in fact to deploy Neutron properly they should use lib/neutron-legacy instead of lib/neutron now.
Great... I guess that explains why Ironic has never really been able
to completely get the "newer" plugin to work as of recent. Well, that
and changes to devstack seem to tend to take a very long time to get
reviews when we have encountered things that can be fixed in the case
of use in the Bare Metal case.
Is there an up to date central running list of issues anywhere? I know
at some point support to choose vlan finally merged with-in the last
few months, so that is at least one major item that has blocked ironic
> > Personally I never really checked exactly what issues are there in fact but I do remember some issues with using lib/neutron e.g. on subnodes in multinode jobs - see .
> > So I would like to ask a question what do You think we should do with it.
> > Is there maybe any volunteer who would like to continue this work on adopting lib/neutron and to finally use it in gate jobs?
> > Or if there is no anyone and we are all fine with using old module, maybe we should remove this lib/neutron and â??undeprecateâ?? and rename lib/neutron-legacy?
> >  https://github.com/openstack/devstack/commit/2a242519f71e86416e78541826cac2b54fcd04a5
> >  https://review.opendev.org/#/c/662480/
> Thanks for looking at this again. My initial thought is to complete the
> work as it's so close, this topic has the remaining abandoned reviews,
> I wish I remembered more about why we never finished, I only remember
> bgpvpn needed some work, just don't remember much else. Could
> definitely do some of the reviews.
I also think it would be good, but I'm curious why we can't break the
plugin out of devstack itself like a number of other projects have
plugins which allow changes to be reviewed and merged rapidly by the
team working closest to the service code base?