On 16 November 2013 08:31, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote: >> and building on unstable Nova APIs. Anything which we accept is a part >> of OpenStack should not get randomly made unusable by one contributor >> while other contributors constantly have to scramble to catch up. Either >> stuff winds up being broken too often or we stifle progress in Nova >> because we're afraid to make breaking changes. > > > the ceilometer plugin for nova hit this, and had to be scrapped. It hooked > into nova-compute and at one point made nova-compute hang there for minutes > at a time. > > I agree, that hooking into our underlying python APIs is a bad idea and a > recipe for disaster. But at the same time I do like having things live in a > separate repo, at the very least until they are mature enough to be pulled > into mainline. > > But if we do go with the separate repo solution, what are the issues with > proxying third party APIs on top of OpenStack REST APIs? Using the REST > APIs would mean we have a stable contract for these third party APIs to > consume, and we also get more feedback about fixing our own API at the same > time.
As long as the metadataservice doesn't move out :) - that one I think is pretty core and we have no native replacement [configdrive is not a replacement :P]. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev