On Mon, Jun 23 2014, Ben Nemec wrote: > We actually don't use this in lockutils - we use our own > implementation of LockFile because there was some sort of outstanding > bug in pylockfile that made it not work for us. The only place I can > see that we do use that project is in the oslo.db code because we > didn't want to depend on incubator modules there, but once > oslo.concurrency graduates we can switch to using our own locking > implementation again.
Oh you're right, I got confused while chasing the bug. > Basically I think this would be duplicating what we're already doing > in lockutils, so I'm -1 on it. I'd rather focus on getting > oslo.concurrency graduated and remove pylockfile from > global-requirements to make sure no one is using it anymore. That'd work for me. > This also makes me wonder if oslo.concurrency should not be an oslo.* > library since this functionality is more generally applicable outside > OpenStack. Something to discuss anyway. Agreed. I also think there is some potential relation with tooz, as it provides locking on a distributed fashion. So it can be seen as a complement of tooz I'd say. Maybe something to think about. -- Julien Danjou -- Free Software hacker -- http://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev