I personally don't see any value in that approach over the existing one, but I won't block it :)
I would see some value if the APIs itself were changing frequently. In that case you could potentially iterate over all the available APIs with this proposed approach, but right now this is not really a big deal. APIs don't change often and when you work with some API and driver you need to explicitly select it (and need to be aware of the selection). I guess you could argue that just doing "import libcloud" is a bit more convenient, but then again what we are really doing is just moving that logic from import line to the function name and function arguments so it's not really reducing complexity or anything. And then again I would argue Python already includes good support for namespacing things called packages and that's what we use right now (with the proposed approach we would replace that "Pythonic" thing with a thing which would better be used in languages which don't have good native support for namespacing things, imo). On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1:30 AM, anthony shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've just created a PR, #822, proposing a slightly new API for 1.1, it > is backward compatible but would form the new recommended entry path > for instantiating drivers. > > I took a leaf out of requests book, (import requests; requests.get(' > goole.com')) > > Instead of the current > > from libcloud.compute.providers import Provider > from libcloud.compute.providers import get_driver > > cls = get_driver(Provider.RACKSPACE) > > The new way is > > import libcloud > cls = libcloud.get_driver(libcloud.DriverType.COMPUTE, > libcloud.DriverType.COMPUTE.RACKSPACE) > > OR > > import libcloud > cls = libcloud.get_compute_driver(libcloud.DriverType.COMPUTE.RACKSPACE) > > Comments please. > > https://github.com/apache/libcloud/pull/822 > > Ant >
