On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 09:30:30 -0700 Dan Smith <d...@danplanet.com> wrote:
> > If the idea is to gate with nova-extra-drivers this could lead to a > > rather painful process to change the virt driver API. When all the > > drivers are in the same tree all of them can be updated at the same > > time as the infrastructure. > > Right, and I think if we split those drivers out, then we do *not* > gate on them for the main tree. It's asymmetric, which means > potentially more trouble for the maintainers of the extra drivers. > However, as has been said, we *want* the drivers in the tree as we > have them now. Being moved out would be something the owners of a > driver would choose in order to achieve a faster pace of development, > with the consequence of having to place catch-up if and when we > change the driver API. If that's what the owners of the driver want to do then I've no problem with supporting that approach. But I very much think that we should aim to have drivers integrated into the Nova tree as they mature so we can gate on them. Or if not in the tree then at least have a system that supports developing in a way that makes gating on them possible without the downside pains of not being able to change internal APIs easily. Chris. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
