Neutron-fwaas Scorecard

Neutron integration

  • N0. Does the project use the Neutron REST API or rely on proprietary backends?

    Neutron-fwaas implements its own set of Neutron API extensions on top of the Neutron core framework and it does so by using the service plugin model. The API exposed has open source implementations, and it provides a pluggable mechanism for proprietary backends.

  • N1. Does the project integrate/use neutron-lib?

    Yes. The migration report shows that there are currently ~400 total imports. Neutron is imported ~100 times and Neutron-lib only ~20 times, for a migration percentage of 18.045%. The project has periodic validation with neutron-lib.

  • N3. Do project members collaborate with the core team to enable subprojects to loosely integrate with the Neutron core platform by helping with the definition of modular interfaces?

    The team has worked successfully in delivering the L3 agent extension framework, that enabled the team to break the fork of the L3 agent. However, this framework should be contributed to neutron-lib to help increase the positive score of N2, which is in progress. See: Migrate neutron agent extensions to neutron-lib <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/385045/_>

  • N4. How does the project provide networking services? Does it use modular interfaces as provided by the core platform?

    Yes.

  • N5. If the project provides new API extensions, have API extensions been discussed and accepted by the Neutron drivers team? Please provide links to API specs, if required.

    The fwaas v1 and v2 API have been widely discussed and accepted.

Documentation

Continuous Integration

  • C4. Does the project have CI for fullstack coverage?

    No.

  • C6. How does a project validate upgrades on a continuous basis? Does the project require or support CI for Grenade coverage?

    No, but it does in the experimental queue. Some tests need to be identified as smoke tests.

Release footprint

  • R1. Does the project adopt semver?

    Yes.

  • R2. Does the project have release deliverables? Provide proof as available in the release repo.

    Yes, the release is responsibility of the neutron-release team.

Stable backports

  • S1. Does the project have stable branches and/or tags? Provide history of backports.

    Yes, stable maintenance is responsibility of the neutron-stable-maint team.

Client library

  • L1. If the project requires a client library, how does it implement CLI and API bindings?

    There are Neutron CLI and API bindings for v1, none released for v2 yet.

Scorecard

Scorecard
N0 | Y
N1 | Y
N2 | Y
N3 | Y
N4 | Y
N5 | Y
D1 | Y
D2 | N
D3 | Y
D4 | N
C1 | Y
C2 | Y
C3 | Y
C4 | N
C5 | N
C6 | N
C7 | N
C8 | Y
R1 | Y
R2 | Y
R3 | Y
R4 | Y
S1 | Y
L1 N

Final remarks

At the time of writing the project scores positively in 17 out of 22 criteria. Even though the fwaas team has made quite a progress during the Newton cycle, closing the gap on all the remaining unmet criteria in time for Ocata-1 (Nov 14 2016) seems challenging.