> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 11:57 AM
> To: Edison Su
> Cc: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in
> 4.2?
>
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:55:03PM +0000, Edison Su wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 11:22 AM
> > > To: Edison Su
> > > Cc: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be
> supported in 4.2?
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:12:22PM +0000, Edison Su wrote:
> > > > If it's ok to use S3 api talking to swift, then there is zero
> > > > effort to support
> > > Swift.
> > > > But who will make the decision?
> > >
> > > We, as a community. It's *always* that answer.
> > >
> > > If you are proposing this as the corrective path, then ok... let's
> > > see if others have opinions about this though.
> > >
> > > Heres how I see it:
> > >
> > > Pros -
> > > * Code within the master branch has functional S3 API support
> > > * We seem to have more contribution around this interface spec
> > > * Having S3 as the only non-NFS secondary storage API reduces the
> > > long-term support / test efforts
> > >
> > > Cons -
> > > * We may have an expectation issue for existing users that only
> have the
> > > native Swift API enabled in their environment (although I'm not
> aware
> > > of the Swift API's stability between their releases)
> >
> > I think you get into the same situation as I did, without input from
> users who is using Swift, or the company who is supporting Swift, what
> we are talking about here is just hypothetic.
> > If we really want to support Swift, and support it better, we need to
> get domain expert involved in the discuss.
>
> Does your $dayjob happen to have a customer that might be using this
> integration? If so, could your $dayjob product manager chime in on the
> discussion?
>
[Animesh>] I followed up with $dayjob product manager, there was a customer who
was interested in this integration a while back but did not end up using it.
> >
> > > * We haven't tested Swift as an S3 API provider yet (but could).
> > >
> > > Personally, if it gets tested and proven to work as well or better
> > > than other
> > > S3 providers, I'm +1 on this being the remediation approach.
> > >
> > > Others?
> >
