[openstack-dev] [glance][keystone][artifacts] Service Catalog name for Glance Artifact Repository API

Brian Rosmaita brian.rosmaita at RACKSPACE.COM
Sat Dec 12 04:25:25 UTC 2015

On 12/11/15, 3:13 PM, "Ian Cordasco" <ian.cordasco at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:

>On 12/11/15, 12:25, "Alexander Tivelkov" <ativelkov at mirantis.com> wrote:
>>Hi folks!
>>As it was decided during the Mitaka design summit, we are separating the
>>experimental Artifact Repository API from the main Glance API. This API
>>will have a versioning sequence independent from the main Glance API and
>>will be run as a standalone optional
>> service, listening on the port different from the standard glance-api
>>port (currently the proposed default is 9393). Meanwhile, it will remain
>>an integral part of the larger Glance project, sharing the database,
>>implementation roadmap, development and review
>> teams etc.
>+1 to 9494 for DevStack so developers can run Arti and Searchlight along
>side each other.

+1 to port 9494 

>>Since this API will be consumed by both end-users and other Openstack
>>services, its endpoint should be discoverable via regular service catalog
>>API. This rises the question: what should be the service name and service
>>type for the appropriate entree in
>> the service catalog?
>>We've came out with the idea to call the service "glare" (this is our
>>internal codename for the artifacts initiative, being an acronym for
>>"GLance Artifact REpository") and set its type to "artifacts". Other
>>alternatives for the name may be "arti" or "glance_artifacts"
>> and for the type - "assets" or "objects" (the latter may be confusing
>>since swift's type is object-store, so I personally don't like it).
>For the type, I would think either "asset" or "artifact" (along the lines
>of how glance is "image", and neutron is "network"). I tend to lean
>towards "artifact" though.

+1 to type 'artifact' (singular, as Ian suggests, to be consistent with
the other services)

>As for the "default" (I assume DevStack) name, why not just "glare", the
>description should be "Glance Artifact Service" (which I think is slightly
>more end-user important than the name).

+1 to name 'glare'
+1 to description 'Glance Artifact Service'

>>Well... we all know, naming is complicated... anyway, I'll appreciate any
>>feedback on this. Thanks!
>>Alexander Tivelkov

Guess I could've just said, "what Ian said".


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list