[openstack-dev] [all][tc] Languages vs. Scope of "OpenStack"

Ben Meyer ben.meyer at rackspace.com
Tue May 24 15:34:58 UTC 2016

On 05/24/2016 11:13 AM, Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com
> <mailto:flavio at redhat.com>> wrote:
>     So, just to make sure I'm making myself clear, I believe we should
>     go with
>     option #2 in Thierry's comment from May 23 11:3 on this[0] review.
>     While I'm not
>     entirely opposed to #1 I think #2 is better for us at this point
>     in time. Here's
>     a quote of Thierry's comment:
>           "To summarize my view on this, I think our only two options
>     here are (1)
>           approve the addition of golang (with caveats on where it
>     should be used
>           to try to minimize useless churn), or (2) precise the line
>     between
>           'openstack projects' and 'dependencies of openstack
>     projects' in a way
>           that makes it obvious that components requiring such
>     optimization as to
>           require golang (or any other such language) should be
>     developed as
>           dependencies"
>     My main motivation is that I still believe option #1 will have a
>     negative impact
>     on the community and, perhaps more importantly, I don't think
>     it'll help
>     reaching the goal we've been talking about in this thread. Many
>     people have been
>     asking for focus and I think #2 will do that, whereas #1 will open
>     the doors to
>     a different set of problems and complexities that won't help with
>     keeping the focus.
> Option #2 without the followup of actually evaluating and removing
> things that do not fit is really Option #3, do nothing. Which is what
> I am afraid will happen.  No renewed focus, no growth, no goal.
> On the language front, since we want focus, the exiting decisions re
> languages should also be part of that re-evaluation for focus.  It
> sure feels like JavaScript is in exactly the same boat as folks fear
> Golang will be here (a special case, domain-specific, division of
> community (ask Horizon devs)).  And Bash, well, that isn't even a
> language.

Just $0.02 - if you want to support a language, then it would seem like
having a full SDK for that language would be a first step so that people
inside and outside the community can use the language in a supported
manner. With an SDK, it seems like everyone will just reinvent the
wheel. That would also seem to further the goal of using the language as
the community intends - whether for services, clients, or UI - since the
SDK would be targeted appropriately. If no SDK, then special casing
would seem to the proper place.

Again, $0.02

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160524/0c3af094/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list