The backlog of New Modules in Extras is here:
The original intention of the Extras module split was to allow us to
be more generous with acceptance criteria of new modules, to help grow
our functionality and community more quickly. I don't think we're
making as much progress as we could be making in merging these
modules, and I believe it's because our current process is too
Here are the baseline criteria for acceptance of modules into Extras,
as I see them:
1. New modules have been tested in good faith by users who care about them;
2. New modules adhere to the module guidelines;
3. The submitter of the module is willing and able to maintain the
module over time.
What do these three criteria have in common? Trust.
We must trust that the people who say "I have tested this module" have
actually done so. We trust that people who say "this module passes
guidelines" have checked against those guidelines carefully. We trust
that the submitters of these modules will fix issues as they arise,
and evaluate and merge pull requests as needed.
So that's what I'd like to do. No longer will we require approvals of
a small set of individuals; instead, we'll open up the review process
to everybody. Here's how it will work:
* All new modules will require two approvals:
+ One "worksforme" approval from someone who has
thoroughly tested the module, including all parameters
+ One "passes_guidelines" approval from someone who
has vetted the code according to the module guidelines.
* Either of which can be given, in a comment, by anybody
(except the submitter, of course).
* Any module that has both of these, and no "needs_revision"
votes (which can also be given by anybody) will be approved
* The core team will continue to be the point of escalation for
any issues that may arise (duplicate modules, disagreements
over guidelines, etc.)
Does this new policy increase the risk of poor reviews, thus
increasing the risk of buggy modules? It might. But I think that's
okay. Modules are modular for a reason; if a module doesn't work
perfectly, the pain is limited only to the flawed module itself --
which is not the end of the world. So long as we have maintainers who
are committed to improving their modules over time, I think we'll be
Note that inclusion of a module in Extras does not imply permanence in
the same way that inclusion in Core does. If modules in Extras go
unmaintained, we will seek new maintainers, and if we don't find new
maintainers, we will ultimately deprecate them.
Our new policy is effective immediately, and we will start going
through the backlog of new modules asap. If there's a module you've
been waiting to see, you can start testing and reviewing them right
away, adding the text "passes_guidelines" or "worksforme" or
"needs_revision" as appropriate.
Module guidelines can be found here:
Thanks, as always, for your support and your patience.
Ansible Community Guy
Find out why SD Times named Ansible
their #1 Company to Watch in 2015: