Open Stack

On 08/22/2012 06:35 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
> 
> On Aug 22, 2012, at 5:10 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:
>>
>> If this lands, then I can apt-get/yum install folsom openstack, then I
>> can apt-get/yum install the non-landed additional driver that itself is
>> written against openstack in a fairly seamless manner. That means that
>> the driver code can live, not as a patch to folsom nova, but as a legit
>> add-on project. Then - when grizzly comes out and the driver code
>> _lands_ the config references that would have been deployed to use the
>> driver via the entrypoint name will not have to change in the config
>> files, because they'll be using entrypoint names and not python library
>> path indications.
> 
> If it doesn't land, it seems like you could still do the above, you would
> just have to specify the full path into your module in the config option
> (i.e. compute_driver = some_module.driver.Driver)
> 
> I understand that entry-points is much nicer, but is there some additional
> feature besides cleanliness that we are enabling?

Mainly cleanliness. The one difference is that the config wouldn't need
to change if/when the driver lands upstream - but that's probably not death.