[openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zeromq] 'Subgroup' for broker-less ZeroMQ driver

ozamiatin ozamiatin at mirantis.com
Tue Mar 24 16:57:25 UTC 2015

+1 for subgroup meeting

Does the separate repository mean separate library (python package) with 
its own release cycles so on?

As I can see the separate library makes it easy:

1) To support optional (for oslo.messaging) requirements specific for 
zmq driver like pyzmq, redis so on
2) Separate zmq testing. Now we have hacks like skip_test_if_nozmq or 
something like that.

Disadvantages are:
1) Synchronization changes with oslo.messaging (Changes to the 
oslo.messaging API may break all things)
2) Additional effort for separate library management (releases so on)

As for me, I like the idea of separate repo for zmq driver because it 
gives more freedom for driver extension.
There are some ideas that we can have more than a single zmq driver 
implementation in future.
At least we may have different versions one for HA and one for 
scalability based on different zmq patterns.

Oleksii Zamiatin

On 24.03.15 18:03, Ben Nemec wrote:
> On 03/24/2015 10:31 AM, Li Ma wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
>>> The goal we set at the Kilo summit was to have a group of people
>>> interested in zmq start contributing to the driver, and I had hoped to
>>> the library overall. How do we feel that is going?
>> That sounds great. I hope so.
>>> One way to create a separate group to manage the zmq driver is to move
>>> it to a separate repository. Is the internal API for messaging drivers
>>> stable enough to do that?
>> Actually I'm not intended to move it to a separate repository. I just
>> want to make sure if it is possible to make a fixed online meeting for
>> zmq driver.
> And personally I'd prefer not to split the repo.  I'd rather explore the
> idea of driver maintainers whose +1 on driver code counts as +2, like we
> had/have with incubator.  Splitting the repo brings up some sticky
> issues with requirements syncs and such.  I'd like to think that with
> only three different drivers we don't need the overhead of managing
> separate repos, but maybe I'm being optimistic. :-)
> Kind of off topic since that's not what is being proposed here, but two
> different people have mentioned it so I wanted to note my preference in
> case it comes up again.
> -Ben
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list