Open Stack

On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 15:24 -0500, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 03/03/2014 02:59 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> > -1 from me. Sounds like a way to avoid badly needed change and
> > innovation in the API. When, for example, would we be able to propose a
> > patch that removed API extensions entirely?
> 
> v3 didn't address this at all, anyway.  I'm not even sure there's
> consensus on it.  In any case, I think it's tangential and only relevant
> if we're starting with a new API.

I guess I am saying that if the ostensibly "limited" changes and
standardization of Chris and others' V3 API work has now been decided is
too risky to use or of not enough value to users, then the chance that a
brand new API version seeing the light of day is pretty low. And that is
disappointing to me. Feel free to tell me I'm nuts, though. I'd happily
exchange my skepticism for some healthy optimism.

> > The inconsistent naming, capitalization, numerous worthless or pointless
> > API extensions, ability to do similar or identical things in different
> > ways, and the incorrect result/response codes makes the Nova API look
> > immature and clownish. I'd love to see a competing proposal to this that
> > looks towards the future and a day when we can be proud of the Compute
> > API as a real differentiator vs. the EC2 API. As it stands, the v2 REST
> > API just makes OpenStack Compute look subpar at best, IMO.
> 
> Much of what you discuss is addressed in the document.

Well, it's discussed in the document... in as much to say "we won't
really change any of these things..."

> I think the differentiation that you want comes from a new ground-up
> API, and not what's being discussed here (v3, or further evolution of v2).

Yes, but my concern about this proposal is that it reinforces the status
quo and in so doing, slows down the pace of innovation at the API level.
And, a slow pace of API innovation in turn inhibits innovation at layers
of the code beneath the API.

> > Feel free to accuse me of wanting my cake and eating it, too. I guess
> > I'm just both hungry and impatient.
> 
> Not that, exactly ... just ignoring some of the practicalities at hand,
> I think.

Fair enough. :)

Best,
-jay