[openstack-dev] [Glance][All] Pecan migration strategies

Fei Long Wang flwang at cn.ibm.com
Wed Jan 15 10:11:08 UTC 2014

I'm echoing markwash's concern. At least for Glance, I didn't see a strong
justification or function gap to push us switching to Pecan. So I prefer to
implement it in next major version and pending it in Glance v2.

Thanks & Best regards,
Fei Long Wang (王飞龙)
Tech Lead of Nitrogen (SME team)
Cloud Solutions and OpenStack Development
Tel: 8610-82450513 | T/L: 905-0513
Email: flwang at cn.ibm.com
China Systems & Technology Laboratory in Beijing

From:	Mark Washenberger <mark.washenberger at markwash.net>
To:	"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
            <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
Date:	01/15/2014 08:16 AM
Subject:	Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][All] Pecan migration strategies

This time, with content!

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:

  More discussions around the adoption of Pecan.

  I'd like to know what is the feeling of other folks about migrating
  existing APIs to Pecan as opposed to waiting for a new API version as
  an excuse to migrate the API implementation to Pecan?

  We discussed this in one of the sessions at the summit, I'd like to
  get a final consensus on what the desired migration path is for the
  overall community.

  IIRC, Cinder has a working version of the API with Pecan but there's
  not a real motivation to release a new version of it that will use
  the new implementation. Am I right?

  Nova, instead, will start migrating some parts but not all of them and
  it'll happen as part of the API v3. AFAIU.

  Recently a new patch was proposed in glance[0] and it contains a base
  implementation for the existing API v2. I love that patch and the fact
  that Oleh Anufriiev is working on it. What worries me, is that the
  patch re-implements an existing API and I don't think we should just
  swap them.

Yes, I'm a bit worried about just swapping in a new implementation, too,
much as I think the approach using Pecan is superior to the way we
initially went. At this time I don't see a really compelling reason to
switch. It would be neat however if there are any people who actually want
to run the Pecan implementation of the v2 API--if so it might be worth
taking it on into upstream. But unless we actually think there is some
future development in v2.0 that will be substantially eased by using Pecan
I think we should probably not switch implementations until there is a
major version bump.

  Yes, we have tests (unit and functional) and that should be enough to
  make sure the new implementation works as the old one - Should it?
  Should it? - but...

  This most likely has to be evaluated in a per-project basis. But:

     - What are the thoughts of other folks on this matter?


  [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62911/

  Flavio Percoco

  OpenStack-dev mailing list
  OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org

OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140115/05977831/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140115/05977831/attachment.gif>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list