[openstack-dev] When should things get added to Oslo.Incubator

Joshua Harlow harlowja at yahoo-inc.com
Tue Dec 3 22:44:49 UTC 2013

Sure sure, let me not make that assumption (can't speak for them), but
even libraries on pypi have to deal with API instability.

Just more of suggesting, might as well bite the bullet (if objects folks
feel ok with this) and just learn to deal with the pypi method for dealing
with API instability (versions, deprecation...). Since code copying around
is just creating a miniature version of the same 'learning experience'
except u lose the other parts (versioning, deprecation, ...) which comes
along with pypi and libraries.

Anyways, just a thought.


On 12/3/13 2:39 PM, "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 22:31 +0000, Joshua Harlow wrote:
>> Sure, no one has said it. But it seems to be implied, otherwise these
>> types of discussions wouldn't occur. Right?
>You're assuming the Nova objects API is at a point where the maintainers
>of it feel ready to commit to API stability.
>> On 12/3/13 2:25 PM, "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>> >On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 22:07 +0000, Joshua Harlow wrote:
>> >
>> >> Process for process sake imho has been a problem for oslo.
>> >
>> >It's been reiterated many times, but again - the only purpose of
>> >oslo-incubator is as a place to evolve an API until we're ready to make
>> >a commitment to API stability.
>> >
>> >It's often easier to start a new API completely standalone, push it to
>> >PyPI and plan for API backwards compatibility from the start. No-one
>> >ever said that such APIs need to go through oslo-incubator "for process
>> >sake".
>> >
>> >Mark.
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> >OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list