On 22/06/15 12:43 -0700, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Young's message of 2015-06-22 11:26:54 -0700:On 06/20/2015 10:28 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> > > As promissed: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/193804/ > > Cheers, You can't deprecate a driver without providing a viable alternative.Right now, QPID is the only driver that supports Kerberos. TO support Kerberos, tyou need support for the GSSAPI library, which is usually done via support for SASL. Why is it so convoluted...historical... We've talked with both teams (I work with Ken) and I think Proton is likely going to be the first to have support. The folks working on Rabbit have the double hurdle of getting SASL support into Erlang first, and then support for SASL into Rabbit. They've indicated a preference for getting it in to the AMQP 1.0 driver, and not bothering with the exisiting, but, check me on this, the Oso.Messaging code only support the pre 1.0 Rabbit. So..until we have a viable alternative, please leave QPID alone. I've not been bothering people about it, as there seems to be work to get ahead, but until either Rabbit or Proton support Kerberos, I need QPID as is.Adam that is all great information, thank you. However, the policy is clear: commit resources for integration testing, or it needs to move out of tree. It's not a mountain of resources. Just an integration test that passes reliably, and a couple of QPID+OpenStack experts who we can contact when it breaks. If nobody is willing to put that much effort in, then it is not really something we want in our official messaging library tree. So please if you can carry that message up to those who want it to stay in tree, that would be helpful and would put the stops on this deprecation.
Agreed with the above. I'd also like to add that it was also discussed with folks previously maintaining the qpid driver what their plans with that work were and the agreement of deprecating it was reached with them. I know this doesn't solve the current problem of not having kerberos support but it clears that this discussion has been had already. That said, the point being raised is very good and unfortunate. Cheers, Flavio
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
-- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
pgpq_zrNRSEVp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
