[openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go
Fox, Kevin M
Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov
Tue May 3 22:37:30 UTC 2016
RadosGW has been excluded from joining the OpenStack community in part due to its use of c++. Now that we're talking about alternate languages, that may be on the table now?
From: Doug Hellmann [doug at doughellmann.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go
Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2016-05-03 22:11:06 +0000:
> If we let go in, and there are no pluggable middleware, where does RadosGW and other Swift api compatible implementations then stand? Should we bless c++ too? As I understand it, there are a lot of clouds deployed with the RadosGW but Refstack rejects them.
RadosGW isn't part of an OpenStack project, and DefCore requires running
the code produced by our community, not just code that meets the same
> From: Doug Hellmann [doug at doughellmann.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 2:50 PM
> To: openstack-dev
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] supporting Go
> Excerpts from John Dickinson's message of 2016-05-03 13:01:28 -0700:
> > On 3 May 2016, at 12:19, Monty Taylor wrote:
> > > On 05/03/2016 01:45 PM, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
> > >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:03 AM John Dickinson <me at not.mn
> > >> <mailto:me at not.mn>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> As a starting point, what would you like to see addressed in the
> > >> document I'm drafting?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> the things I've had to address:
> > >>
> > >> - Common language formatting rules (ensure that a pep8-like thing exists).
> > >> - Mirroring dependencies?
> > >> - Building Documentation
> > >
> > > Mirroring and building are the ones that we'll definitely want to work together on in terms of figuring out how to support. go get being able to point at any git repo for depends is neat - but it increases the amount of internet surface-area in the gate. Last time I looked (last year) there were options for doing just the fetch part of go get separate from the build part.
> > >
> > Are these the sort of things that need to be in a resolution saying that it's ok to write code in Golang? I'll definitely agree that these questions are important, and I don't have the answers yet (although I expect we will by the time any Golang code lands in Swift). We've already got the Consistent Testing Interface doc which talks about having tests, a coding style, and docs (amongst other things). Does a resolution about Golang being acceptable need to describe dependency management, build tooling, and CI?
> I think it makes sense to start documenting the expected interface for
> projects written in Go, for the same reason that we have the others, and
> I don't think we would want to say "Go is fine" until we at least have a
> start on that documentation -- otherwise we have a gap where projects
> may do whatever they want, and we have to work to get them back into
> > --John
> >  http://governance.openstack.org/reference/project-testing-interface.html
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev