Open Stack

On 15/01/14 18:11 +0800, Fei Long Wang wrote:
>I'm echoing markwash's concern. At least for Glance, I didn't see a strong
>justification or function gap to push us switching to Pecan. So I prefer to
>implement it in next major version and pending it in Glance v2.
>
>Thanks & Best regards,
>Fei Long Wang (王飞龙)
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Tech Lead of Nitrogen (SME team)
>Cloud Solutions and OpenStack Development
>Tel: 8610-82450513 | T/L: 905-0513
>Email: flwang at cn.ibm.com
>China Systems & Technology Laboratory in Beijing
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Inactive hide details for Mark Washenberger ---01/15/2014 08:16:39 AM---This
>time, with content! On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AMark Washenberger ---01/15/
>2014 08:16:39 AM---This time, with content! On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AM,
>Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>From: Mark Washenberger <mark.washenberger at markwash.net>
>To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
><openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
>Date: 01/15/2014 08:16 AM
>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance][All] Pecan migration strategies
>━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
>
>
>
>This time, with content!
>
>
>On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>    Greetings,
>
>    More discussions around the adoption of Pecan.
>
>    I'd like to know what is the feeling of other folks about migrating
>    existing APIs to Pecan as opposed to waiting for a new API version as
>    an excuse to migrate the API implementation to Pecan?
>
>    We discussed this in one of the sessions at the summit, I'd like to
>    get a final consensus on what the desired migration path is for the
>    overall community.
>
>    IIRC, Cinder has a working version of the API with Pecan but there's
>    not a real motivation to release a new version of it that will use
>    the new implementation. Am I right?
>
>    Nova, instead, will start migrating some parts but not all of them and
>    it'll happen as part of the API v3. AFAIU.
>
>    Recently a new patch was proposed in glance[0] and it contains a base
>    implementation for the existing API v2. I love that patch and the fact
>    that Oleh Anufriiev is working on it. What worries me, is that the
>    patch re-implements an existing API and I don't think we should just
>    swap them.
>
>
>Yes, I'm a bit worried about just swapping in a new implementation, too, much
>as I think the approach using Pecan is superior to the way we initially went.
>At this time I don't see a really compelling reason to switch. It would be neat
>however if there are any people who actually want to run the Pecan
>implementation of the v2 API--if so it might be worth taking it on into
>upstream. But unless we actually think there is some future development in v2.0
>that will be substantially eased by using Pecan I think we should probably not
>switch implementations until there is a major version bump.


Agreed. This is my exact concern and opinion at this moment.

Cheers,
FF

> 
>
>
>    Yes, we have tests (unit and functional) and that should be enough to
>    make sure the new implementation works as the old one - Should it?
>    Should it? - but...
>
>    This most likely has to be evaluated in a per-project basis. But:
>
>       - What are the thoughts of other folks on this matter?
>
>    Cheers,
>    FF
>
>    [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62911/
>
>    --
>    @flaper87
>    Flavio Percoco
>
>    _______________________________________________
>    OpenStack-dev mailing list
>    OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>    http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>_______________________________________________
>OpenStack-dev mailing list
>OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



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


-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140115/fca30258/attachment.pgp>