Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2016-07-27 21:51:15 +0000: > Its a standard way of launching a given openstack service container with > specified config regardless if its backed with a redhat or ubuntu or source > based package set that the Operator can rely on having a standardized > interface to. distro packages don't grantee that kind of thing and don't want > to. > > To me, its an abstraction api kind of like nova is to kvm vs xen. the nova > user shouldn't have to care which backend is chosen. >
You're not wrong, and I do believe there is programming happening to these interfaces. However the surface area of the API you describe is _WAY_ too big to justify the work to maintain it as a single entity. This is really why deployment tooling is so diverse. Hardware, networks, business rules, operating systems, licensing, regulatory constraints... all of those are part of a real deployment, and trying to make an API that allows covering all of those bases, versus just having a bunch of specific-ish implementations, has so far resulted in acceptance of more implementations nearly every time. __________________________________________________________________________ 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
