I personally would like to avoid promoting things to core that aren't
implementations of an abstraction - I know we've got DNS stuff that doesn't
have an abstraction in core, but, again, personally, I don't much care for
that. I'd be in favor of holding off on moving trove from labs->core until
there's a "cloud db" abstraction a la compute/blobstore for RDS/trove to
implement.

A.

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Matt Stephenson <[email protected]>wrote:

> It sounds like a primary motivator is to widen the audience.  We have many
> providers and apis in labs that are more widely adopted.  Historically this
> hasn't been a major barrier to adoption overall.
>
> The goal of labs was to provide a place to release software that we still
> feel is in flux overall.  How stable is the overall API for this if we've
> not really done much work on RDS lately to ensure that a unified API
> between the two (long term) is possible without changing the api into the
> trove provider?
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Everett Toews
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > On Jul 29, 2013, at 2:03 PM, Matt Stephenson wrote:
> >
> > > We currently have an outstanding set of pull requests for this, prior
> to
> > us
> > > discussing this on dev.  I'm personally not in favor of promoting it at
> > > this time because I feel it's a bit too immature at this time.
> >
> > Software gains maturity by being released to a wider audience and by
> being
> > used. And what we have here is more than a minimum viable product. It's
> > complete, working support for the OpenStack Trove/Rackspace Cloud
> Databases
> > API.
> >
> > > We still
> > > have a good deal of other apis that there is more demand for to be
> > promoted
> > > up.
> >
> > It's not an either/or situation amongst the APIs. If an API is complete,
> > it can be promoted.
> >
> > > What value do we gain by promoting this as the only api of it's kind
> into
> > > jclouds now?
> >
> > We gain a wider audience. We gain the experience of seeing how people use
> > it and what problems they run into. We gain the insights and experience
> > that are necessary to create higher level abstractions. All of those
> things
> > that helps software mature.
> >
> > Just because an implementation from another provider isn't ready, doesn't
> > mean we should hold back on releasing software. We need to start
> somewhere.
> >
> > In general, the value of jclouds increases for our users because we'll
> > have complete and maintained support for another cloud API.
> >
> > > Who in the community is using this in labs today?
> >
> > Naturally we (Rackspace) are. There are also examples and doc ready to
> go.
> > Having a "labs" label on something will prevent many from adopting it.
> >
> > > How comfortable are we as a community in supporting this and working on
> > > issues related to it?
> >
> > I can say with complete conviction that, as a part of this community,
> > Zack, Jeremy, and myself are 100% committed to supporting it and working
> on
> > issues related to it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Everett
>

Reply via email to