Open Stack

On Aug 7, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 13:45 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> 
>> I was thinking a single namespace package "openstack" with
>> single-level nested packages such as openstack.config,
>> openstack.messaging (to include rpc and notifications),
>> openstack.server (service and manager-related stuff, maybe also the
>> wsgi stuff). The "common" feels a little redundant.
> 
> I wasn't convinced the first time you suggested it, but I'm warming to
> the idea :)
> 
> When an API like cfg, rpc or server is ready to come out of incubation
> we just move it from openstack.common to openstack.config or whatever.
> We'd also move it into a separate git repo.

That would be a good indicator of the incubatedness of the package. 

> 
>> OTOH, it would be even better if we came up with names that didn't
>> include "openstack" in the distro or package name. That would help
>> avoid the Zope-branding issue that keeps other projects from adopting
>> a lot of the useful components that came out of the Zope project just
>> because they are apparently tied to Zope. Of course, naming is one of
>> the hard problems in compsci. :-)
> 
> I suspect a lot or stuff will be only used by OpenStack project, but
> it's a fair point that there's no reason to necessarily exclude the
> possibility.
> 
> Naming ... How about Oslo? Short, begins with "OS" and "lo" has a vague
> connotations of "base" or "foundation".

I had meant to avoid having a single shared namespace at all for packages we expected to be useful outside of openstack, but if you want to use one then Oslo is good.

> 
>  pip install oslo

pip install oslo-config
pip install oslo-messaging

> 
>  from oslo.config import cfg
>  from oslo.messaging import rpc
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark.
>