[openstack-dev] [all] the trouble with names

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Thu Feb 4 15:45:20 UTC 2016

On 02/04/2016 10:31 AM, Nick Chase wrote:
> What about using a combination of two word names, and generic names. For
> example, you might have 
>     cinder-blockstorage
> and
>     foo-blockstorage
> The advantage there is that we don't need to do the thesaurus.com
> <http://thesaurus.com> thing, but also, it enables to specify just
>     blockstorage
> via a registry.  The advantage of THAT is that if a user wants to change
> out the "default" blockstorage engine (for example) we could provide
> them with a way to do that.  The non-default would have to support the
> same API, of course, but it definitely fits with the "pluggable" nature
> of OpenStack.

This feels a bit like all the downsides of #1 (people have to know about
codenames, and make projects know about the codenames of other projects)
+ all the downsides of #2 (we still need a naming registry).

I do agree it is a 4th option, but the downsides seem higher than either
#1 or #2.


Sean Dague

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list