Open Stack

On 02/12/2016 07:48 AM, Everett Toews wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> I need to air a concern over the create openstack/service-registry [1] patch which aims to create an OpenStack service type registry project to act as a dedicated registry location for service types in OpenStack under the auspices of the API Working Group.
> 
> My concern is that it gets the API Working Group partially into the big tent governance game. Personally I have zero interest in big tent governance. I want better APIs, not to become embroiled in governance. That said, I do fully recognize that by their nature APIs in general (not just OpenStack) play a large role in governance.
> 
> The purpose of this email is not to dissuade the API WG from taking on this responsibility. In fact, now that we've got a lot of experience authoring guidelines and shepherding them through the guideline process, it's time the WG evolved. My purpose is to simply make sure we go into this with eyes wide open and understand the consequences of doing so. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Everett
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278612/

I guess I'm unclear on the concerns, or possibly in the role of the API WG.

The API WG is currently building some more generic recommendations.
There has been a feeling expressed the API WG should take a more active
role in shaping the API in OpenStack. Which is clearly going to mean
caring at least a little about governance.

My assumption here is that nothing can register a service endpoint
unless it's already an official project in OpenStack. Which means most
of that is back on the TC. However someone still needs to be sorting
things out here as the service types thing is kind of a mess today.

If you don't think that's the API WG, that's fine (it is why this went
to the mailing list last week), we can create a different subgroup for
this. The core team is a dedicated group so it doesn't need to overlap
with API WG.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net