Open Stack

On 11/02/2013 11:26 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 11/02/2013 11:54 AM, Adrian Otto wrote:
>> Noorul,
>>
>> I agree that key decisions should be tracked in blueprints. This is the
>> one for this decision which was made in our 2013-10-18 public meeting.
>> Jay's submission is consistent with the direction indicated by the team.
>>
>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/solum/+spec/rest-api-base
>>
>> Transcript log:
>> http://irclogs.solum.io/2013/solum.2013-10-08-16.01.log.html
>> <http://irclogs.solum.io/2013/solum.2013-10-08-16.01.log.html>
>
> Heh, not much discussion there.  :-)

Agreed. I actually didn't know anything about the discussion -- I wasn't 
at the meeting. I just figured I would throw some example code up to 
Gerrit that shows how Falcon can be used for the API plumbing. Like I 
mentioned in a previous email, I believe it's much easier to discuss 
things when there is sample code...

> Here's my take ... Pecan+WSME has been pushed as the thing to
> standardize on across most OpenStack APIs.  Ceilometer (and maybe
> others?) are already using it.  Others, such as Nova, are planning to
> use it this cycle. [1][2]

I've used both actually, and I've come to prefer Falcon because of its 
simplicity and specifically because of the following things:

* It's lack of integration with WSME, which I don't care for. I don't 
care for WSME because I believe it tries to put the model at the view 
layer, instead of where it belongs, at the model layer.
* It doesn't need a configuration file, specifically a configuration 
file that is a Python file as opposed to an .ini file.

> I care less about the particular choice and more about consistency.  It
> brings a lot of value, such as making it a lot easier for developers to
> jump around between the OpenStack projects.  Can we first at least agree
> that there is value in standardizing on *something* for most OpenStack APIs?

I completely understand the need for consistency. I pushed my patch as 
an example of how to do things the Falcon way. While I would prefer 
Falcon over Pecan (and certainly over Pecan+WSME), I will respect the 
push towards consistency if that's what is most important.

That said, I also believe that the projects in Stackforge should be the 
"laboratories of experiment", and these projects may serve as a good 
playground for various implementations of things. I remind the reader 
that over time, the development community has standardized on various 
things, only to find a better implementation in an incubated project. 
Pecan+WSME is actually an example of that experimentation turned 
accepted standard.

Best,
-jay

> I understand that there may be cases where the needs for an API justify
> being different.  Marconi being more of a data-plane API vs
> control-plane means that performance concerns are much higher, for example.
>
> If we agree that consistency is good, does Solum have needs that make it
> different than the majority of OpenStack APIs?  IMO, it does not.
>
> Can someone lay out a case for why all OpenStack projects should be
> using Falcon, if that's what you think Solum should use?
>
> Also, is anyone willing to put up the equivalent of Jay's review [3],
> but with Pecan+WSME, to help facilitate the discussion?
>
> [1]
> http://icehousedesignsummit.sched.org/event/b2680d411aa7f5d432438a435ac21fee
> [2]
> http://icehousedesignsummit.sched.org/event/4a7316a4f5c6f783e362cbba2644bae2
> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/55040/
>