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

Hayes, Graham graham.hayes at hpe.com
Thu Feb 4 17:57:16 UTC 2016

On 04/02/2016 15:40, Ryan Brown wrote:
> On 02/04/2016 09:32 AM, michael mccune wrote:
>> On 02/04/2016 08:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Hayes, Graham wrote:
>>>> On 04/02/2016 13:24, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>>>> Excerpts from Hayes, Graham's message of 2016-02-04 12:54:56 +0000:
>>>>>> On 04/02/2016 11:40, Sean Dague wrote:
>>>>>>> 2) Have a registry of "common" names.
>>>>>>> Upside, we can safely use common names everywhere and not fear
>>>>>>> collision down the road.
>>>>>>> Downside, yet another contention point.
>>>>>>> A registry would clearly be under TC administration, though all the
>>>>>>> heavy lifting might be handed over to the API working group. I still
>>>>>>> imagine collision around some areas might be contentious.
>>>>>> ++ to a central registry. It could easily be added to the
>>>>>> projects.yaml
>>>>>> file, and is a single source of truth.
>>>>> Although I realized that the projects.yaml file only includes official
>>>>> projects right now, which would mean new projects wouldn't have a place
>>>>> to register terms. Maybe that's a feature?
>>>> That is a good point - should we be registering terms for non tent
>>>> projects? Or do projects get terms when they get accepted into the tent?
>>> I don't see why we would register terms for non-official projects. I
>>> don't see under what authority we would do that, or where it would end.
>>> So yes, that's a feature.
>> i have a question about this, as new, non-official, projects start to
>> spin up there will be questions about the naming conventions they will
>> use within the project as to headers and the like. given that the
>> current guidance trend in the api-wg is towards using "service type" in
>> these cases, how would these projects proceed?
>> (i'm not suggesting these projects should be registered, just curious)
> This isn't a perfect solution, but maybe instead of projects.yml there
> could be a `registry.yml` project that would (of course) have all the
> project.yml "in-tent" projects, but also merge in external project
> requests for namespaces?

Where ever it is stored, could this be a solid place for the api-wg to
codify the string that should be shown in the catalog / headers /
other places by services?

> Say there's an LDAP aaS project, it could ask to reserve "directory" or
> whatever and have a reasonable hope that when they're tented they'll be
> able to use it. This would help avoid having multiple projects expecting
> to use the same name, while also not meaning we force anyone to use or
> not use some name.
> Effectively, it's a gerrit-backed version of "dibs".
>>> I think solution 2 is the best. To avoid too much contention, that can
>>> easily be delegated to the API WG, and escalated to the TC for
>>> resolution only in case of conflict between projects (or between a
>>> project and the API WG).
>> i'm +1 for solution 2 as well. as to the api-wg participation in the
>> name registration side of things , i don't have an objection but i am
>> very curious to hear Everett's and Chris' opinions.
>> regards,
>> mike
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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