[openstack-dev] [Oslo] Layering olso.messaging usage of config

Joshua Harlow harlowja at yahoo-inc.com
Fri Dec 6 17:50:45 UTC 2013

Forgive me for not understanding your precious email (which I guess was confusing for me to understand). This one clears that up. If only we all had Vulcan mind meld capabilities, haha.

Thanks for helping me understand, no need to get frustrated. Not everyone is able to decipher your email in the same way u wrote it, part of this ML should be about teaching others your viewpoints, not getting frustrated over simple things like misunderstandings...

Sent from my really tiny device...

> On Dec 6, 2013, at 9:16 AM, "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 16:55 +0000, Joshua Harlow wrote:
>> I really have to agree with this. It's especially important if
>> oslo.messaging is also used in libraries like taskflow. If
>> oslo.messaging imposes that users of it must use oslo.config then by
>> using it in taskflow, taskflow then imposes the same oslo.config
>> usage.
> You know, I think you either didn't read my (carefully considered) email
> or didn't take the time to understand it. That's incredibly frustrating.
> My proposal would mean that oslo.messaging could be used like this:
>  from oslo import messaging
>  conf = messaging.get_config_from_dict(dict(rpc_conn_pool_size=100))
>  transport = messaging.get_transport(conf, 'qpid:///test')
>  server = Server(transport)
>  server.start()
>  server.wait()
> oslo.config is nothing but an implementation detail if you used
> oslo.messaging in this way.
> (Julien had a more subtle concern about this which I can actually relate
> more to)
>> This makes all libraries that use it inherently only useable in the
>> openstack ecosystem which I think is very bad opensource behavior (not
>> exactly open).
> "bad open-source behaviour"? Seriously?
> Yeah, like gtk+ is only usable in the GNOME ecosystem because it uses
> glib and gtk+ authors are bad open-source people because they didn't
> allow an alternative to glib to be used. Bizarre statement, frankly.
>> There are other reasons to, a configuration dict means u can have
>> many different active instances being simultaneously used (each with
>> its own config), with oslo.config since it is a static configuration
>> object u get 1 simultaneous instance. So this is yet another behavior
>> that I as a library provider thing is very unhealthy restriction to
>> impose on people that use taskflow.
> "1 simultaneous instance" ... you mean the cfg.CONF object?
> There's no requirement to use that and I explained that in my email
> too ... even though I actually thought it should need no explaining at
> this point.
> Mark.

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list