Open Stack

On Mon, 2012-11-19 at 13:18 -0800, Boris Renski Jr. wrote:
> Since we are talking about OpenStack core and respective roles of TC and
> board in helping define this, I have a matter up for discussion that's been
> bothering me for some time. 

I honestly think we've enough on our plate right now with the current
discussion without getting into this. We're working hard on this thread
to build some form of consensus around one specific issue. Introducing a
much broader topic into the discussion really doesn't help.

> Today we have two types of projects that are core. Those where the bigger
> emphasis is on the API and APIs are loosely coupled with the implementation
> or even third party functionality or plug-ins (Nova, Quantum, Cinder) and
> those that are really opinioned implementations of certain functionality -
> Swift (probably the most pronounced member of the second category), Horizon
> etc. 
>
> For instance, similar to Quantum, Swift could have been designed as an API
> centric service with implementations as plug-ins; but it is not. And largely
> due to the history of how OpenStack evolved, Swift now became the monopoly
> implementation on object store, indefinitely enjoying core project status.
> It is not unlikely that Swift could become less active and its opinionated
> architecture - less relevant to the newer paradigms of storage. More
> importantly, because something like Swift is core, nobody in the community
> would even consider developing a different, competing implementation.... 
> 
> I am not trying to pick on Swift in particular (so John, don't get mad) but
> am using it to illustrate a scenario. 

It sounds like you want Swift to have a plugin architecture with the
current backend implementation being just one of several plugins?

It seems like a vaguely reasonable idea and, indeed, the GlusterFS team
have done work around building a GlusterFS plugin for Swift. Whether
that idea is adopted is solely a question for the Swift team and whether
it makes sense for the projects' goals.

However, I wouldn't support the Board or the TC attempting to somehow
mandate this kind of stuff to projects by wrapping it up in some sort of
"The OpenStack Project is API focused and welcomes multiple
implementations of those APIs" verbiage. From my perspective, the
project cares far more about its implementation than its APIs.

But, again, I think this has the potential to be a massive distraction
from the topic at hand.

Cheers,
Mark.