On 06/04/2015 10:14 AM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
On Jun 4, 2015 8:57 AM, "Monty Taylor" <mord...@inaugust.com
> So, seriously - let's grow up and start telling people that they do not > get to pick and choose user-visible feature sets. If they have an unholy > obsession with a particular backend technology that does not allow a > public feature of the API to work, then they are deploying a broken > cloud and they need to fix it. > So I just had dinner last night with a very large user of OpenStack (yes, they exist) whose single biggest request is that we stop "differentiating" in the API. To them, any difference in the usability / behavior / API between OpenStack deployment X and Y is a serious enough problem that it will have two effects: - vendor lock in - they stop using OpenStack And since avoiding single vendor lock in is important to them, well, really it has only one result. Tl;Dr; Monty is right. We MUST NOT vary the API or behaviour significantly or non-discoverably between clouds. Or we simply won't have users.
If a vendor wants to "differentiate" themselves, what about having two sets of API endpoints? One that is full vanilla openstack with bog-standard behaviour, and one that has vendor-specific stuff in it?
That way the end-users that want interop can just use the standard API and get common behaviour across clouds, while the end-users that want the "special sauce" and are willing to lock in to a vendor to get it can use the vendor-specific API.
Chris __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
