Open Stack

On 07/05/15 19:19 -0500, Dolph Mathews wrote:
>    We didn't pick Falcon because Kurt was Marconi's PTL and Falcon's
>    maintainer. The main reason it was picked was related to performance
>    first[0] and time (We didn't/don't have enough resources to even think
>    of porting the API) and at this point, I believe it's not even going
>    to be considered anymore in the short future.
>
>
>I'm just going to pipe up and say that's a terribly shallow reason for choosing
>a web framework, and I think it's silly and embarrassing that there's not a
>stronger community preference for more mature frameworks. I take that as a sign
>that most of our developer community is coming from non-Python backgrounds,
>which is fine, but this whole conversation has always felt like a plague
>of Not-Invented-Here, which baffles me.

Not sure how to parse your email but, FWIW, the community did what was
necessary to promote Pecan and the team decided to stick with Falcon.

I don't believe performance and good fit for your use-case are shallow
reasons to pick a framework.

Most of the projects are using Pecan and it works very well for them
and I believe, as I mentioned in my previous email, it's the framework
projects should default to.

Flavio

>    There were lots of discussions around this, there were POCs and team
>    work. I think it's fair to say that the team didn't blindly *ignored*
>    what was recommended as the community framework but it picked what
>    worked best for the service.
>
>    [0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Zaqar/pecan-evaluation
>
>
>
>            pecan is a wsgi framework written by Dreamhost that eventually
>            moved
>            itself into stackforge to better enable collaboration with our
>            community
>            after we settled on it as the API for things moving forward.
>
>            Since the decision that new REST apis should be written in Pecan,
>            the
>            following projects have adopted it:
>
>            openstack:
>            barbican
>            ceilometer
>            designate
>            gnocchi
>            ironic
>            ironic-python-agent
>            kite
>            magnum
>            storyboard
>            tuskar
>
>            stackforge:
>            anchor
>            blazar
>            cerberus
>            cloudkitty
>            cue
>            fuel-ostf
>            fuel-provision
>            graffiti
>            libra
>            magnetodb
>            monasca-api
>            mistral
>            octavia
>            poppy
>            radar
>            refstack
>            solum
>            storyboard
>            surveil
>            terracotta
>
>            On the other hand, the following use falcon:
>
>            stachtach-quincy
>            zaqar
>
>
>
>        To me this is a strong indicator that pecan will see more eyes and
>        possibly be more open to improvement to meet the general need.
>
>
>    +1
>
>
>            That means that for all of the moaning and complaining, there is
>            essentially one thing that uses it - the project that was started
>            by the
>            person who wrote it and has since quit.
>
>            I'm sure it's not perfect - but the code is in stackforge - I'm
>            sure we
>            can improve it if there is something missing. OTOH - if we're going
>            to
>            go back down this road, I'd think it would be more useful to maybe
>            look
>            at flask or something else that has a large following in the python
>            community at large to try to reduce the amount of special we are.
>
>
>
>        +1
>
>
>    Please, lets not go back down this road, not yet at least. :)
>
>
>
>
>            But honestly - I think it matters almost not at all, which is why I
>            keep
>            telling people to just use pecan ... basically, the argument is not
>            worth it.
>
>
>    +1, go with Pecan if your requirements are not like Zaqar's.
>    Contribute to Pecan and make it better.
>
>    Flavio
>
>    --
>    @flaper87
>    Flavio Percoco
>

-- 
@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/20150508/10a5dc52/attachment.pgp>