Thanks, Ignasi. FWIW my personal timeframe is sometime in the next 3 months. I still have azure on the backlog after the google stuff.
-A On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Ignasi Barrera <n...@apache.org> wrote: > I'd love to help, but to be honest I won't have time. I plan to spend the > following weeks cleaning up the tech debt in Chef (migrating to MWS all its > tests and studying moving the model to autovalue) and dropping all the > unnecessary apis from Abiquo and rewriting it completely. For this purpose, > though, I'll follow the patterns in GCE and look closely to the development > of this new ec2 provider. > El 14/11/2014 16:50, "Adrian Cole" <adrian.f.c...@gmail.com> escribió: > >> > Having a modern, up-to-date AWS EC2 provider would be great, of course. >> > Would the plan here be to remove aws-ec2 once this is done and/or to be >> > backwards-compatible with it? >> Absolutely no goal of being compatible with the 2009-era design of the >> existing ec2 provider. >> >> > Do you think one of the "in progress" providers (GCE etc.) is >> sufficiently >> > finished to work as a good example of what we want a provider to look >> like? >> > As has been discussed a few times already, I think new contributors >> > especially would really benefit from having an example that we consider >> > worth copying, and if possible I think we should focus on getting that >> done >> > before starting on another provider. >> Contributors are already looking at GCE and working with the new design. >> >> side-note: An area we can all improve on is not waiting to be >> spoon-fed some document. This is open source, not a corporate job. We >> should follow the example of GCE contributors who are happy to learn >> as they go, and actually pay attention to notes called out to them on >> github and jira. >> >> > Happy to try to help with that (unfortunately, I don't have much time >> right >> > now) if hands are needed! >> cool. I will start this in a while. In the mean time, we need to do a >> better job with ec2. I'm embarrassed that we add spend time reviewing >> obscure apis, but leave ec2 to rot. Things like below should never be >> reported by developers. At least some of us should feel the fire that >> people depend on ec2 being able to operate, if not be current as a >> *higher* priority than adding obscure apis. >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-774 >>
