2015-03-24 23:20 GMT+09:00 Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 01:04:46PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-03-23 21:31:30 -0400 (-0400), Jay Pipes wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 09:35:50PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-03-23 15:15:18 -0400 (-0400), Jay Pipes wrote:
[...]
I don't want it suppressed. I want the use of API extensions and
the
extension framework(s) to be completely dropped for all future
API-affecting work.
[...]
Perhaps controversial, but would it be worthwhile to propose to the
Defcore working group that future compliance requirements include
the absence of extensions to officially covered APIs?
I don't understand what you're getting at, Jeremy. Could you
elaborate?
What do extensions have to do with future compliance requirements?
Defcore's focus is on establishing interoperability standards for
OpenStack deployments, to ease the end-user experience. Right now
its model depends on a whitelist of API features. As discussed many
times before and brought up again in this thread, when providers or
distributors augment OpenStack APIs to add their own special
features without implementing them upstream, this necessarily
creates interoperability issues.
Defcore's focus is on determining what is OpenStack, w.r.t. what is
brandable as OpenStack. It's focus is not on establishing interoperability
standards.
I am not sure how you got to that conclusion, yes the defcore process has
been very confusing and I am still not really sure what it was, but some
part of it it *is* about interoperability/
Although our wiki does get out of date very easily, I think this still holds
true:
DefCore sets base requirements by defining 1) capabilities, 2) code and 3)
must-pass tests for all OpenStack products. This definition uses community
resources and involvement to drive interoperability by creating the minimum
standards for products labeled OpenStack.
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/DefCoreCommittee
Related to this topic, Nova v2.1 API defines core APIs by itself[1],
but I feel now it is better to remove the definition from Nova.
On current implementation, the boot of nova-api fails if the above
core APIs are not loaded.
but that behavior seems conflict to Defcore process, and it would be
nice to concentrate on Defcore to define what are core APIs.
Thanks
Ken Ohmichi
---
[1]:
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/__init__.py#L66
__
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
