Open Stack

Well said, Vish. A few comments inline below. The parts I snipped out
were the ones I entirely agree with or had no comments on...

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya
<vishvananda at gmail.com> wrote:
> OpenStack Project Integration
>
> Another responsibility of the PTL is to make sure that Nova is
> well-integrated with the other openstack components.  The PTL needs to have
> a clear picture of new and needed features in glance and swift, as well as
> any new projects that are added to OpenStack.
>
> It is also vital that we focus on common components over the next couple
> releases.  If we don't do this the projects will gradually grow apart, and
> it will be very difficult to present a coherent OpenStack deployment
> involving all of the projects.  The most important first-step in my mind is
> Authn/Authz.  A common authentication system will do wonders for keeping the
> projects aligned.

Much agreed on authn/authz, as I think that is an area that we can
achieve agreement on.

But for other things like configuration/CLI options, there is quite a
bit of disagreement between the projects. Discussions in the past
about stuff like this has devolved into either non-productive
flame-war-like threads or non-productive compromises that nobody is
happy with and so nobody uses them.

The danger of having a PTL focusing on integration efforts with
openstack-common is having the PTL's attention be sucked down the
black hole of endless discussions about code style and what "the best
practice" is for doing X. Not saying it's an unworthy goal to achieve
some commonality, but the PTL shouldn't, IMO, be the driver here.
Better to have some working group devoted to finding common ground.
The PTL could end up being on that working group, but could just as
likely not be on it.

> Code Consistency
>
> We must spend time cleaning up pylint scores and vetting the unit tests and
> various parts of the code for common style.  We need a clear developer guide
> and toolset configuration examples for new developers.  These will allow new
> developers become productive more quickly.

Again, this will meet with disagreement between the teams working on
the various projects. Or are you specifically referring to the Nova
code consistency here? Because I'm pretty sure the Swift devs aren't
going to be interested in having Swift's code look and feel like
Nova's codebase, and asking for cross-project code style consistency
is going to be one of those black hole conversations, with various
groups insisting their way is the "right" way, etc. And here, I don't
just mean stuff in pep8, but the focus on object-orientation, the use
of various libraries, the use of various abstraction techniques, etc,
etc.

To repeat, all the snipped parts of your message (most of it), I
completely agree with and fully support you.

Cheers,
-jay