Open Stack

On 11/24/2015 07:27 AM, Dougal Matthews wrote:
>
>
> On 24 November 2015 at 07:45, Richard Su <rwsu at redhat.com 
> <mailto:rwsu at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 11/17/2015 07:31 AM, 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.
>>
>>     What do others think?
>>
>>
>
>     I have started the process of renaming the repo with these patches:
>     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/247834/
>     https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/252864/
>
>     Jan made an interesting suggestion that it may be easier to create
>     a new repo named tripleo and move the tripleo-common code there.
>     With renaming, I'm already see some complications with the
>     tripleo-common package builds failing in the CI until updated spec
>     is merged.
>
>     What do folks think about this? I am unsure which is more
>     complicated, creating a new repo and all the setup that goes with
>     it. Or renaming the existing repo and fixing CI issues along the way.
>
>
> I'm not sure which is easier or better, but if we do create a new repo 
> we need to make sure we carry over the git history.

Good idea. I have submitted a request to create the new repo.

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249521/

>
>     - Richard
>
>>
>>             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
>>         <mailto: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
>>     <mailto: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://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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151125/b0411e4d/attachment.html>