On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Thierry Carrez <[email protected]>wrote:
> Russell Bryant wrote: > > Perhaps going through this process for a single project first would be > > helpful. I agree that some clarification is needed on the details of > > the expected result. > > At this point, I think we can break their request into two separate > questions. > > The first one is high level, simple and technical: "which parts of each > project have a pluggable interface ?" We should be able to list those in > an objective fashion, and feed objective input into the second question. > > The second question is more subjective: "where, in that list, is it > acceptable to run an out of tree implementation ?" Where would you say > you can substitute code in Nova and still consider running the resulting > beast is running nova ? The scheduler for example was explicitly > designed so that you can plug your own algorithm -- so I think an out of > tree scheduler class is fine... so I would exclude the scheduler classes > (ChanceScheduler and others) from the "designated sections". > Since that second question is more subjective, I think the answer should > be a recommendation that the TC would collect and pass to the board. > > As a first step, I think we should answer the technical first question. > There is no imposed format for the answer, so any freeform list will do. +1 -- having good developer docs for all of our publicly pluggable APIs will be a good thing anyway. Doug > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
