Open Stack

Hi,

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Sam Betts (sambetts)
<sambetts at cisco.com> wrote:
> I personally disagree with saying that if we wanted it make it usable by
> projects other than ones in the Ironic umbrella it should go into oslo. I
> think that non-ironic projects directly related to Ironic such as out of
> tree drivers etc, should be able to utilise the code placed into
> ironic-lib.
>
> Neutron are doing a very similar thing for all their drivers/extensions
> they have broken out over the last 2 cycles,
> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/liberty/neutron-li
> b.html.
>
> Making ironic-lib available to out of tree drivers etc also puts us into a
> good position to begin the work to stabilise things like the driver API.
> Neutron is making the rule that out of tree drivers shouldn¹t
> inherit/import anything from the neutron core code base, only neutron-lib,
> they are doing this to provide a stable interface that shouldn¹t be broken
> by changes to neutron core. I think we could do the same, with in-tree
> drivers dog-fooding the driver api we provide in ironic-lib.
>

I'm personally fine with that goal, if we as a community agree that in
the soon future of ironic-lib should target a broader audience. The
thing is that I don't think the lib was conceived with that in mind,
we started small (baby-steps) sharing partitioning code from Ironic
and Ironic-Python-Agent, now that it's done we can start working
towards making it a more generic library.

What I don't think we should do is say that the library's _right now_
ready for it, the interfaces we have at the moment should not be
considered stable, Ironic is very opinionated in many aspects
(specially when partitioning the disk), there's no documentation, no
release notes, etc...

So, if agreed, let's do it, but let's do it properly.

Cheers,
Lucas