I found that AT&T Synaptic offers a public Atmos provider which our integration tests mostly pass. fog and libcloud continue to provide Atmos support and I believe Dell/EMC ECS supports Atmos API as well as S3. Thus we should give Atmos a reprieve.
Except that I want to improve our object listing support, preferring prefix and delimiters over our fake directory support: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1066 I will investigate this more but I do not want to do a bunch of hacking to support an unused provider. Please speak up if you use Atmos. On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 10:24:38AM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote: > Given the silence in this thread, I'd say go ahead and remove it. > > On 3 July 2017 at 23:47, Andrew Gaul <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > Does anyone use the EMC Atmos provider? As I understand it, EMC has not > > developed this in some years, preferring the S3 and Swift protocols for > > its products. Atmos is a bit of an odd bird, having more of a > > filesystem interface and semantics than an object store and lacking > > features like multi-part upload and server-side filtering. The recent > > disappearance of Atmos Online leaves me unable to test the provider for > > the jclouds 2.0.2 release. I would like to remove the Atmos provider if > > no one is using it. > > > > -- > > Andrew Gaul > > http://gaul.org/ -- Andrew Gaul http://gaul.org/
