Is there a good reason NOT to do this?
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Eric Windisch <e...@cloudscaling.com> wrote: > I believe that the RPC backend should no longer have any default. > > > > Historically, it seems that the Kombu driver is default only because it > existed before all others and before there was an abstraction. With > multiple implementations now available, it may be time for a change. > > Why? > * A default skews the attitudes and subsequent architectures toward a > specific implementation > > > * A default skews the practical testing scenarios, ensuring maturity of > one driver over others. > * The kombu driver does not work "out of the box", so it is no more > reasonable as a default than impl_fake. > * The RPC code is now in openstack-common, so addressing this later will > only create additional technical debt. > > My proposal is that for Folsom, we introduce a "future_required" flag on > the configuration option, "rpc_backend". This will trigger a WARNING > message if the rpc_backend configuration value is not set. In Grizzly, we > would make the rpc_backend variable mandatory in the configuration. > > Mark McLoughlin wisely suggested this come before the mailing list, as it > will affect a great many people. I welcome feedback and discussion. > > Regards, > Eric Windisch > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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