Open Stack

Thomas,

On Apr 22, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier at de.ibm.com>
 wrote:

> Steven,
> 
>> From: Steven Hardy <shardy at redhat.com>
>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
>> Date: 22.04.2013 14:54
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] TOSCA support blueprint updated
>> after design discussions at Havana summit
>> 
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 05:32:22PM +0200, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
>>> 
>>> Heaters,
>>> 
>>> I have just updated the blueprint [1] for adding TOSCA support in Heat
> to
>>> reflect the outcome of discussions at the design summit.
>>> Please have a look if this matches your understanding as well and post
>>> comments if anything should be changed.
>>> 
>>> Thanks again to everyone at the summit for the great discussions we
> had. It
>>> was great to meat all of you and working with you!
>>> 
>>> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/tosca-support
>> 
>> Looks good, but I'm wondering if we should either revise the summary
>> wording (and title) to reflect the narrowed scope we discussed (e.g "Add
>> support for translation of TOSCA templates to native DSL"), or raise a
> new
>> BP and mark this one superseded?
> 
> I would opt for changing the title and summary of the BP to fit to the
> latest discussions instead of superseeding this with a new BP. If you
> agree, I will take a first pass tomorrow and we can iterate over it.
> Makes sense to make this BP dependent on the DSL BP as a pre-req. We would
> probably keep the TOSCA (or additional formats) translation BP on hold and
> focus on the DSL and its implementation for now and then see what we can
> achieve on top and when.
> 
> Ok for everyone?

Yes, I'm happy with that. Any opposing viewpoints? 

>> I've approved the DSL blueprint (and changed the title and description a
>> bit, I hope Adrian is OK with that..):
>> 
>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/open-api-dsl
>> 
>> We can use this to track the definition and implementation of the native
>> DSL discussed at the summit.
>> 
>> I've made the tosca-support BP depend on open-api-dsl, as my
> understanding
>> is we're now aiming to add a standalone translation tool to do a one-time
>> re-rendering of TOSCA into the native DSL format, once we've defined and
>> implemented it.
>> 
>> Steve

Adrian