Open Stack

Hi Victor,

>>> The openstack.common module also known as "Oslo Incubator" or "OpenStack Common Libraries" has 44 dependencies. IMO we reach a point where it became too huge. Would it be possible to split it into smaller parts and distribute it on PyPI with a stable API? I don't know Olso Incubator enough to suggest the best granularity. A hint can be the number of dependencies.

This is exactly what we've been doing in Icehouse (and are going to
continue to do this in Juno). In terms of oslo-incubator it's called
'graduation' of an incubator's part - it becomes a full-fledged
library distributed via PyPi.

>>> Sharing code is a good idea, but now we have SQLAchmey, WSGI, cryptographic, RPC, etc. in the same module. Who needs all these features at once? Olso Incubator must be usable outside OpenStack.

Sure! But I'd say even now one can use/sync only the particular
modules of oslo-incubator he/she needs. Though, I agree, releasing
these modules as libraries would simplify reusing of the code.

>>> We should now maybe move code from Oslo Incubator to "upstream" projects. For example, timeutils extends the iso8601 module. We should maybe contribute to this project and replace usage of timeutils with directy call to iso8601?

Agreed. I can't say for other libraries, but in oslo.db we've been
contributing features and bug fixes to SQLAlchemy, alembic and
SQLAlchemy-migrate. But we are still going to have some code, that
won't be merged by upstream, just because it covers a too specific use
case for them (e.g. 'deleted' column which is provided by one of
oslo.db models mixin).

Thanks,
Roman

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Victor Stinner
<victor.stinner at enovance.com> wrote:
> (Follow-up of the "[olso] use of the "oslo" namespace package" thread)
>
> Hi,
>
> The openstack.common module also known as "Oslo Incubator" or "OpenStack
> Common Libraries" has 44 dependencies. IMO we reach a point where it became
> too huge. Would it be possible to split it into smaller parts and distribute
> it on PyPI with a stable API? I don't know Olso Incubator enough to suggest
> the best granularity. A hint can be the number of dependencies.
>
> Sharing code is a good idea, but now we have SQLAchmey, WSGI, cryptographic,
> RPC, etc. in the same module. Who needs all these features at once? Olso
> Incubator must be usable outside OpenStack.
>
>
> Currently, Oslo Incubator is installed and updated manually using a
> "update.sh" script which copy ".py" files and replace "openstack.common" with
> "nova.openstack.common" (where nova is the name of the project where Oslo
> Incubator is installed).
>
> I guess that update.sh was written to solve the two following points, tell me
> if I'm wrong:
>
>  - unstable API: the code changes too often, whereas users don't want to
> update their code regulary. Nova has maybe an old version of Olso Incubator
> because of that.
>
>  - only copy a few files to avoid a lot of dependencies and copy useless files
>
> Smaller modules should solve these issues. They should be used as module:
> installed system-wide, not copied in each project. So fixing a bug would only
> require a single change, without having to "synchronize" each project.
>
>
> Yesterday, I proposed to add a new time_monotonic() function to the timeutils
> module. We asked me to enhance existing modules (like Monotime).
>
> We should now maybe move code from Oslo Incubator to "upstream" projects. For
> example, timeutils extends the iso8601 module. We should maybe contribute to
> this project and replace usage of timeutils with directy call to iso8601?
>
> Victor
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev