45 lines
1.8 KiB
Plaintext
45 lines
1.8 KiB
Plaintext
Hi All
|
|
|
|
It will (probably) come as no surprise that I'd like to announce
|
|
my candidacy for PTL of OpenStack Charms!
|
|
|
|
We've made some good progress in the last cycle with some general
|
|
housekeeping across the charms set, including removal of untested
|
|
and generally unused database and messaging configurations. We've
|
|
also finally managed to complete the deprecation of the Ceph charm
|
|
with a well documented migration path to the newer Charms for
|
|
operators to use.
|
|
|
|
This is all great but we still have more housekeeping todo!
|
|
|
|
Specifically we need to complete migration to using Python 3
|
|
as the default execution environment for charms (this was started
|
|
during Queens, but is not yet complete).
|
|
|
|
I'd like to see more depth in the networking configurations and
|
|
choices the charms present (we already have specs raised for
|
|
Dynamic Routing and Network Segment support) and I think these
|
|
will appeal to operators with more complex networking requirements
|
|
for OpenStack.
|
|
|
|
I think we also need to finish the work we started last year on
|
|
improving the Telemetry storage; Aodh, Gnocchi and Ceilometer are
|
|
all looking in pretty good shape now, but we need to add Panko to
|
|
the fold!
|
|
|
|
I still think we have a bit of an issue with level of entry to
|
|
writing a charm - it turns out that writing a charm is dead easy;
|
|
writing unit tests is also pretty easy and familiar with anyone
|
|
who writes any amount of Python; enabling full functional testing
|
|
of a charm is much harder. Our historic tool choice (amulet) does
|
|
not help in this area and I look forward to working with the dev
|
|
team this cycle to move us onto something that's a) more directly
|
|
maintainable and b) easier to engage with as we bring new charms
|
|
and features onboard.
|
|
|
|
I look forward to helping steer the project during the Rocky cycle!
|
|
|
|
Cheers
|
|
|
|
James
|