Open Stack

One thing that keeps coming up in this discussion is the issue of
"being tied to an API we don't control".

People... We're *fantastically* privileged that we get to define an
API of our own. Lots and lots and lots of people and projects spend
all their time implementing existing (open, but completely static)
protocols and specifications.

Every HTTP, SMTP, and IMAP server on the planet does it. Every single
C compiler on the planet does it. All of these are things that have
been defined a long time ago. You can have all the opinions you want
about IMAP, but that doesn't mean you can just implement it
differently. At least not if you expect people to support your stuff.
When there are ambiguities in the spec, sure, you can insist on taking
one path even though everyone else has taken a different one, but
don't expect the rest of the world to change to accommodate you. If
you want to do offer something better by doing something differently,
offer it as an alternative that people can switch to once you've won
them over. Don't make it a prerequisite.

There's a golden rule when implementing things according to an
existing specification: Be very conservative in what you deliver, and
be very liberal in what you accept. Otherwise, people. will. use.
something. else. period.

-- 
Soren Hansen        | http://linux2go.dk/
Ubuntu Developer    | http://www.ubuntu.com/
OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/