On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 11:00 PM Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com> wrote:

Folks,

I know this was brought up as part of the Virtualbox Python deployment
tool, which in that case we decided to keep it as was proposed in
stx-tools/depolyment/virtualbox (logical location).

We are likely going have more contributions that fall into experimental
that the community may want to try.

Should we have a contrib or experimental repo or subdirectory in
stx-tools for these contributions?

For example the "StarlingX in a box" work, or another different
deployment tool for qemu?

Thoughts?

I am in favour of having an experimental repository where useful code that is not as heavily scrutinized is stored. That code, if used over time, can be moved out of the repository into a more permanent location with full project workflows and processes applied. My canonical example is the osops-tools-contrib [0] repo. I am just always a fan of large open source projects having something like this where new perhaps inexperienced contributors can submit code, or organizations can submit code that is not "fully baked" for overall review for potential usefulness.

Now, how many contributions we might see, and what it might look like are certainly up for debate, but I still think it's a useful repository to have, and if it is not used over time then we can remove it. But without it we'll never know. :)

I am also thinking of myself here as the stx community is putting on a workshop at the summit and there will likely be code and docs that go with that, and perhaps this would be a good place for that kind of thing to live.

Thanks,

Curtis

[0]: https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/osops-tools-contrib/tree/README.rst

Sau!

_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss

Blog: serverascode.com