On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:12:22PM +0000, Edison Su wrote: > If it's ok to use S3 api talking to swift, then there is zero effort to > support Swift. > But who will make the decision?
We, as a community. It's *always* that answer. If you are proposing this as the corrective path, then ok... let's see if others have opinions about this though. Heres how I see it: Pros - * Code within the master branch has functional S3 API support * We seem to have more contribution around this interface spec * Having S3 as the only non-NFS secondary storage API reduces the long-term support / test efforts Cons - * We may have an expectation issue for existing users that only have the native Swift API enabled in their environment (although I'm not aware of the Swift API's stability between their releases) * We haven't tested Swift as an S3 API provider yet (but could). Personally, if it gets tested and proven to work as well or better than other S3 providers, I'm +1 on this being the remediation approach. Others?
