[openstack-dev] [tripleo] Location of TripleO REST API

Ben Nemec openstack at nemebean.com
Wed Nov 25 21:43:20 UTC 2015


On 11/23/2015 06:50 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> On 11/17/2015 04:31 PM, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 10 November 2015 at 15:08, Tzu-Mainn Chen <tzumainn at redhat.com
>>     <mailto:tzumainn at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi all,
>>
>>         At the last IRC meeting it was agreed that the new TripleO REST API
>>         should forgo the Tuskar name, and simply be called... the TripleO
>>         API.  There's one more point of discussion: where should the API
>>         live?  There are two possibilities:
>>
>>         a) Put it in tripleo-common, where the business logic lives.  If we
>>         do this, it would make sense to rename tripleo-common to simply
>>         tripleo.
>>
>>
>>     +1 - I think this makes most sense if we are not going to support
>>     the tripleo repo as a library.
>>
>>
>> Okay, this seems to be the consensus, which is great.
>>
>> The leftover question is how to package the renamed repo.  'tripleo' is
>> already intuitively in use by tripleo-incubator.
>> In IRC, bnemec and trown suggested splitting the renamed repo into two
>> packages - 'python-tripleo' and 'tripleo-api',
>> which seems sensible to me.
> 
> -1, that would be inconsistent with what other projects are doing. I 
> guess tripleo-incubator will die soon, and I think only tripleo devs 
> have any intuition about it. For me tripleo == instack-undercloud.

This was only referring to rpm packaging, and it is how we currently
package most of the other projects.  The repo itself would stay as one
thing, but would be split into python-tripleo and openstack-tripleo-api
rpms.

I don't massively care about package names, but given that there is no
(for example) openstack-nova package and openstack-tripleo is already in
use by a completely different project, I think it's reasonable to move
ahead with the split packages named this way.

> 
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>>
>> Mainn
>>
>>
>>         b) Put it in its own repo, tripleo-api
>>
>>
>>         The first option made a lot of sense to people on IRC, as the
>>         proposed
>>         API is a very thin layer that's bound closely to the code in
>>         tripleo-
>>         common.  The major objection is that renaming is not trivial;
>>         however
>>         it was mentioned that renaming might not be *too* bad... as long as
>>         it's done sooner rather than later.
>>
>>         What do people think?
>>
>>
>>         Thanks,
>>         Tzu-Mainn Chen
>>
>>         __________________________________________________________________________
>>         OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>         Unsubscribe:
>>         OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>         <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>>         http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>     __________________________________________________________________________
>>     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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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