It changes every minor version (the API) the models in the API responses are inconsistent, the behaviours are inconsistent. It smells like an API that's about to get an overhaul. List x entity has different names for fields than get x entity everywhere in the API meaning deserialisations are a nightmare. So you need to maintain n-3 minor versions in order to have some sort of stability. It's a sad state of affairs because they just see the API as the communication mechanism for their command line tool, which they have complete control over.
Sent from Outlook Mobile On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:14 PM -0800, "Ignasi Barrera" <n...@apache.org> wrote: Docker is stable, but the main concern is how fast they deploy new versions of the api and which level of backwards compatibility they have. Does our current version work with the latest api? I don't really know how up to date the provider is, as I'm not an active user. Perhaps some users can share their thoughts, or we can ping them at the IRC channel if they don't show up here. Anyway, the fast api releases is something we can't control, so IMO it doesn't male sense to retain Docker in labs just for that reason. Given its current stable status, I'd say we can promote it too. El 16/2/2016 6:39 p. m., "Andrea Turli" escribió: > +1 > > Speaking of promotions, can we consider jclouds-docker as mature as > profitbricks ? > > Best, > Andrea > > Il giorno mar 16 feb 2016 18:33 Ignasi Barrera ha > scritto: > > > ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's > complete > > with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it! > > El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos" > > escribió: > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1] > started, > > > and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly > > > configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I > > > think it would make sense to now promote this provider. > > > > > > For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and > > the > > > use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available). > > > > > > With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this > > > provider. :) > > > > > > Thanks! > > > RJ > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks > > > [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145 > > > [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224 > > > [4] > > https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest > > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058 > > > [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/ > > > > > >
