Open Stack

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Neil Jerram <Neil.Jerram at metaswitch.com>
wrote:

> On 04/02/16 11:40, Sean Dague wrote:
> > What options do we have?
> >
> > 1) Use the names we already have: nova, glance, swift, etc.
> >
> > Upside, collision problem is solved. Downside, you need a secret decoder
> > ring to figure out what project does what.
>
> This is my preference.  Yes, it means that there is an education hurdle
> for anyone new to OpenStack to overcome.  But once that is done, there
> is a concise and precise term that they and we can all use and understand.
>

Have a look at the browser User-Agent headers and let me know how that has
worked out for them:

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5)
AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/48.0.2564.103 Safari/537.36

Two of those product/code names are lies for compatibility purposes.  We
(OpenStack) should not be promoting that sort of nonsense on our users just
to save us a little bit of inconvenience in the development process.

To add something positive to the discussion, we should remember how much of
OpenStack consists of plugin-capable architecture, specifically so that
out-of-tree components can be accommodated for whatever reason.  The
projects play the role of arbitrator of namespaces in the case of many
back-end drivers.  Having someone do this for OpenStack as a whole is a
necessary part of having a community-wide namespace such as service types.

dt

-- 

Dean Troyer
dtroyer at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160205/62d40bc3/attachment.html>