Thats a better direction. Another way to think about this is to consider this an extensible service framework. If we agree on lightweight code wrappers (apis/modules) first with whatever "backend" each project uses, and then migrate each of those areas to a common implementation, we can inject uniformity and expected levels of instrumentation/capabilities across the projects. Example: log4j extender model...
Jan On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:27 AM, "Brian Lamar" <brian.la...@rackspace.com> wrote: > I don't see it as multiple projects, just as a set of modules: > > openstack.common.config > openstack.common.deployment > openstack.common.logging > ... > etc. > > These are purely modules which help you create you're own > OpenStack-compatible project...all available through a single > openstack-common project. > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Glen Campbell" <glen.campb...@rackspace.com> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 1:20pm > To: "Brian Lamar" <brian.la...@rackspace.com>, > "openstack@lists.launchpad.net" <openstack@lists.launchpad.net> > Subject: Re: [Openstack] OpenStack Common > > Would it better to break it down even further? I.e., instead of trying to > put ALL the common code into one project, create mini projects for > common-logging, common-configuration, etc. That would permit other > projects to adopt what they need, when they need it, rather than trying to > integrate the entire common project at once. > > For example, we're working on converting Glance to use the > logging/notification mechanism defined by Nova. The first step in the > project was, however, "cut and paste notification code" from one to the > other. That's disturbing to me, because it doubles the amount of effort > required to implement changes to the notification system in the future. It > would be much better IMHO to have a refactored common-logging module that > could be included by multiple projects, with a standard interface each > project could rely upon. > > There's no requirement, then, to implement common-rpc when you integrate > common-logging, which lowers the barrier to entry for each project. > > > > > > > On 7/25/11 12:11 PM, "Brian Lamar" <brian.la...@rackspace.com> wrote: > >> All, >> >> I love the idea of having an openstack-common project. However, the >> prospect of creating such a project is daunting and quite difficult. >> >> It's my belief that standardizing/collecting common logic into a single >> module will be beneficial to our current code-base and allow for future >> projects to be created more quickly/easily. >> >> Currently the behemoth in the room is OpenStack Compute (aka Nova). The >> Compute project contains much more code than all other OpenStack projects >> (combined), and rightly so...virtualization is a pretty darn complex >> thing to do in a flexible way. This might be why other projects have been >> spawned to take away some of the logic from a single massive project and >> place that logic into smaller, more focused projects. >> >> However, I would argue that the barrier of entry is too high for this >> strategy to work. Projects such as Quantum, Burrow, Lunr, and Keystone >> suffer from the lack of a single cohesive strategy in the following areas: >> >> -Logging >> -Configuration >> -WSGI >> -RPC >> -Database >> -Testing >> -Deployment/Distribution of code >> >> These are the building blocks which most projects will require, yet every >> project has to create their own implementations? Sure, it's not going to >> be easy, and maybe some categories I've labeled won't make the final cut, >> but I would like to start a conversation with the community as to the >> feasibility of such an endeavor. >> >> This is not the first time such a project has been brought up. Much >> earlier in the year, a number of people suggested moving "lazy loading" >> code into a common project. I would like to think that project died due >> to complexity rather than the community rejecting the idea. >> >> To create a common library of this nature requires a bit of pushing aside >> one's partisan blinders and the abandonment of ideological >> entrenchments*, so hopefully this won't deteriorate into a FLAGS vs. >> argparse flame-war. >> >> TLDR: No >> >> * - Shamelessly stolen from The West Wing (tm) >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, > please delete it. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp