Open Stack

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Eric Windisch <eric at cloudscaling.com> wrote:

> I don't think it is a problem to remove the code in oslo first, as
> long as no other oslo-incubator code uses it. Projects don't have to
> sync the code and could always revert should that they do.

I strongly disagree. It stops projects from syncing with oslo until
they go through the code churn to remove the method.

> However, like Mark, I'm inclined to consider the value of
> is_uuid_like. While undoubtedly useful, is one method sufficient to
> warrant creating a new top-level module. Waiting for it to hit the
> standard library will take quite a long time...
>
> There are other components of oslo that are terse and questionable as
> standalone libraries. For these, it might make sense to aggressively
> consider rolling some modules together?
>
> One clear example would be log.py and log_handler.py, another would be
> periodic_task.py and loopingcall.py

I'm not sure I see the harm in leaving small but widely used modules
in oslo incubator. If we really want to release everything as a
library, can't we just have a generic catchall one for the small
things? oslo.therest perhaps?

Michael

-- 
Rackspace Australia