Open Stack

On Dec 6, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Clint Byrum <clint at fewbar.com>
 wrote:

> Excerpts from Randall Burt's message of 2013-12-06 14:43:05 -0800:
>> I too have warmed to this idea but wonder about the actual implementation around it. While I like where Edmund is going with this, I wonder if it wouldn't be valuable in the short-to-mid-term (I/J) to just add /templates to Glance (/assemblies, /applications, etc) along side /images.  Initially, we could have separate endpoints and data structures for these different asset types, refactoring the easy bits along the way and leveraging the existing data storage and caching bits, but leaving more disruptive changes alone. That can get the functionality going, prove some concepts, and allow all of the interested parties to better plan a more general v3 api.
>> 
> 
> +1 on bolting the different views for things on as new v2 pieces instead
> of trying to solve the API genericism immediately.
> 
> I would strive to make this a facade, and start immediately on making
> Glance more generic under the hood.  Otherwise these will just end up
> as silos inside Glance instead of silos inside OpenStack.

Totally agreed. Where it makes sense to refactor we should do that rather than implementing essentially different services underneath.

> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev