<html><body>
<p><font size="2" face="sans-serif">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. </font><br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif">Thanks & Best regards,<br>
Fei Long Wang (王飞龙)<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Tech Lead of Nitrogen (SME team)<br>
Cloud Solutions and OpenStack Development<br>
Tel: 8610-82450513 | T/L: 905-0513 <br>
Email: flwang@cn.ibm.com<br>
China Systems & Technology Laboratory in Beijing<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</font><br>
<br>
<img width="16" height="16" src="cid:1__=C7BBF6F2DFA407A48f9e8a93df938@cn.ibm.com" border="0" alt="Inactive hide details for Mark Washenberger ---01/15/2014 08:16:39 AM---This time, with content! On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 A"><font size="2" color="#424282" face="sans-serif">Mark Washenberger ---01/15/2014 08:16:39 AM---This time, with content! On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio@redhat.com> wrote:</font><br>
<br>
<font size="1" color="#5F5F5F" face="sans-serif">From: </font><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Mark Washenberger <mark.washenberger@markwash.net></font><br>
<font size="1" color="#5F5F5F" face="sans-serif">To: </font><font size="1" face="sans-serif">"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>, </font><br>
<font size="1" color="#5F5F5F" face="sans-serif">Date: </font><font size="1" face="sans-serif">01/15/2014 08:16 AM</font><br>
<font size="1" color="#5F5F5F" face="sans-serif">Subject: </font><font size="1" face="sans-serif">Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][All] Pecan migration strategies</font><br>
<hr width="100%" size="2" align="left" noshade style="color:#8091A5; "><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="3" face="serif">This time, with content!</font><br>
<font size="3" face="serif"><br>
</font><br>
<font size="3" face="serif">On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Flavio Percoco <</font><a href="mailto:flavio@redhat.com" target="_blank"><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u>flavio@redhat.com</u></font></a><font size="3" face="serif">> wrote:</font>
<ul style="padding-left: 9pt"><font size="3" face="serif">Greetings,<br>
<br>
More discussions around the adoption of Pecan.<br>
<br>
I'd like to know what is the feeling of other folks about migrating<br>
existing APIs to Pecan as opposed to waiting for a new API version as<br>
an excuse to migrate the API implementation to Pecan?<br>
<br>
We discussed this in one of the sessions at the summit, I'd like to<br>
get a final consensus on what the desired migration path is for the<br>
overall community.<br>
<br>
IIRC, Cinder has a working version of the API with Pecan but there's<br>
not a real motivation to release a new version of it that will use<br>
the new implementation. Am I right?<br>
<br>
Nova, instead, will start migrating some parts but not all of them and<br>
it'll happen as part of the API v3. AFAIU.<br>
<br>
Recently a new patch was proposed in glance[0] and it contains a base<br>
implementation for the existing API v2. I love that patch and the fact<br>
that Oleh Anufriiev is working on it. What worries me, is that the<br>
patch re-implements an existing API and I don't think we should just<br>
swap them.</font></ul>
<br>
<font size="3" face="serif">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.</font><br>
<font size="3" face="serif"> </font>
<ul style="padding-left: 9pt"><font size="3" face="serif"><br>
Yes, we have tests (unit and functional) and that should be enough to<br>
make sure the new implementation works as the old one - Should it?<br>
Should it? - but...<br>
<br>
This most likely has to be evaluated in a per-project basis. But:<br>
<br>
- What are the thoughts of other folks on this matter?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
FF<br>
<br>
[0] </font><a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62911/" target="_blank"><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u>https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62911/</u></font></a><font size="3" color="#888888" face="serif"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
@flaper87<br>
Flavio Percoco</font><font size="3" face="serif"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list</font><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org"><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u>OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</u></font></a><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u><br>
</u></font><a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank"><font size="3" color="#0000FF" face="serif"><u>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</u></font></a><font size="3" face="serif"><br>
</font></ul>
<tt><font size="2">_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<br>
</font></tt><tt><font size="2"><a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a></font></tt><tt><font size="2"><br>
</font></tt><br>
</body></html>