Open Stack

On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 14:15 +0200, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> On 05/07/13 14:26, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
> > Hi all, 
> > 
> > I would like to explain very high level steps of our work: 
> > 1) Sync work with DB in all projects (We have what we have, let it be in
> > one place)
> > 2) Refactor work with DB in one place (not independently in all projects) 
> > 
> > So I understand that our code around DB is not ideal, but let it be in
> > one place at first.
> > 
> 
> This is fine in principle, however I don't think we should push it
> without considering the details (where the devil is apparently).
> I am arguing that DB archiving should be re-done and is broken
> conceptually (example below), and I think it would be suboptimal (to say
> the least) to get it everywhere first and then fix it.
> 
> Just saying a hand-wavy "yeah, but once it's in Oslo we can fix it" is
> wrong - especially for functionality that is younger than the time it
> will likely take it to 'graduate' Oslo.

I'm not following this DB archiving debate closely enough to take a
position either way, but ....

I think what you're really arguing is that no other project should adopt
this approach to DB archiving. I'm fine with saying that it shouldn't
move into oslo-incubator if it will only be used in Nova.

So - the debate to have is which projects are proposing to adopt this DB
archiving strategy and whether it makes sense for them to adopt it as is
and fix it up later, or adopt an entirely different approach.

Cheers,
Mark.