On 02/10/2016 03:03 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 02/04/2016 06:38 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
2) Have a registry of "common" names.
Upside, we can safely use common names everywhere and not fear collision
down the road.
Downside, yet another contention point.
A registry would clearly be under TC administration, though all the
heavy lifting might be handed over to the API working group. I still
imagine collision around some areas might be contentious.
We had a good discussion last week here on the list, and I think the
consensus was that:
1) We should use option #2 and have standard service types
2) The API Working Group was probably as good a place as any to own /
drive this.
I'd like to follow on with the following recommendations:
3) This be a dedicated repository 'openstack/service-registry'. The API
WG will have votes on it (I would also suggest the folks that have been
working on Service Catalog TNG - myself, Anne Gentle, Brant Knudson, and
Chris Dent be added to this). The actual registry will be some
structured file that supports comments (probably yaml).
4) We seed it with the 'well known' service types from current devstack.
Then we patch in services one at a time after that as requested.
Basically sift through all the non controversial stuff first. Let debate
happen on the more contentious ones later.
5) We'll build up guidelines in this repo about the kinds of service
types names which we think are good. We may dedicate some reserve words
that are too highly confusing in the OpenStack space to be used (policy
comes to mind).
If there are concerns with this approach let me know. Otherwise I'll
propose the repo tomorrow and try to keep this ball rolling.
-Sean
i think this sounds like a fine idea. +1
mike
__________________________________________________________________________
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
