Open Stack

I don't think you need a spec for this (its a refactor). That said,
I'd be interested in exploring how you deprecate the old flags. Can
you have more than one deprecated name for a single flag?

Michael

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Matt Riedemann
<mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 6/16/2015 4:21 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>>
>> The NFS, GlusterFS, SMBFS, and Quobyte libvirt volume drivers are all
>> very similar.
>>
>> I want to extract a common base class that abstracts some of the common
>> code and then let the sub-classes provide overrides where necessary.
>>
>> As part of this, I'm wondering if we could just have a single
>> 'mount_point_base' config option rather than one per backend like we
>> have today:
>>
>> nfs_mount_point_base
>> glusterfs_mount_point_base
>> smbfs_mount_point_base
>> quobyte_mount_point_base
>>
>> With libvirt you can only have one of these drivers configured per
>> compute host right?  So it seems to make sense that we could have one
>> option used for all 4 different driver implementations and reduce some
>> of the config option noise.
>>
>> I checked the os-brick change [1] proposed to nova to see if there would
>> be any conflicts there and so far that's not touching any of these
>> classes so seems like they could be worked in parallel.
>>
>> Are there any concerns with this?
>>
>> Is a blueprint needed for this refactor?
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/175569/
>>
>
> I threw together a quick blueprint [1] just for tracking.
>
> I'm assuming I don't need a spec for this.
>
> [1]
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/consolidate-libvirt-fs-volume-drivers
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt Riedemann
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Rackspace Australia