On 02/05/2016 08:38 AM, Dean Troyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Chris Dent <cdent...@anticdent.org
<mailto:cdent...@anticdent.org>> wrote:
I think this discussion is dancing around the edges of a referendum on
the "duplication" aspect of the big tent.
It is also dancing around the separation of 'API' from
'implementation'. There is a long-standing disagreement on whether
OpenStack APIs can/should stand on their own, or simply be defined as
'whatever project Foo implements'.
I think you know my opinion on this matter :)
My belief is that we should have a single curated, consistent, and
governed OpenStack API, a reference implementation of that API, and the
ability to have competing implementations of that API to encourage
innovation.
> We already have seen independent
implementations of OpenStack APIs, although not (yet?) as OpenStack
projects. Duplication is already happening in the wild.
I'm aware of multiple competing APIs for the same general problem space
(Ceilometer and Monasca are the canonical example of this), but I'm not
aware of competing implementations of identical APIs. Could you point us
to where this has happened?
-jay
__________________________________________________________________________
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
