Open Stack

On 02/10/2016 03:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 02/04/2016 06:38 AM, 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.
>
> We had a good discussion last week here on the list, and I think the
> consensus was that:
>
> 1) We should use option #2 and have standard service types
>
> 2) The API Working Group was probably as good a place as any to own /
> drive this.
>
> I'd like to follow on with the following recommendations:
>
> 3) This be a dedicated repository 'openstack/service-registry'. The API
> WG will have votes on it (I would also suggest the folks that have been
> working on Service Catalog TNG - myself, Anne Gentle, Brant Knudson, and
> Chris Dent be added to this). The actual registry will be some
> structured file that supports comments (probably yaml).
>
> 4) We seed it with the 'well known' service types from current devstack.
> Then we patch in services one at a time after that as requested.
> Basically sift through all the non controversial stuff first. Let debate
> happen on the more contentious ones later.
>
> 5) We'll build up guidelines in this repo about the kinds of service
> types names which we think are good. We may dedicate some reserve words
> that are too highly confusing in the OpenStack space to be used (policy
> comes to mind).
>
> If there are concerns with this approach let me know. Otherwise I'll
> propose the repo tomorrow and try to keep this ball rolling.
>
> 	-Sean
>

i think this sounds like a fine idea. +1

mike