GitHub user xxchan added a comment to the discussion: discuss: OpenDAL VISION "One Layer, All Storage"
Thinking about cases where "reliable" has a clear meaning: - TCP is reliable (compared to UDP): delivery guarantee - Storage is reliable (compared to memory): persistence - Distributed system is reliable: fault tolerance Here OpenDAL is a library, thus I'm not sure what "reliable" refer to, and not aware of other libraries using this term. It seems too subjective. My point is that as a library's user, I won't expect things can be "unreliable" in the first place... On the contrary, if it's "well-defined behavior", perhaps I can get it may refer to: Different storages may have slightly different behavior, or even undefined behavior. And OpenDAL strives to provide unified (and intuitive?) experience. > When I mention "reliable," I mean that users can trust and depend on OpenDAL > without encountering unexpected behavior. The thing is, if some stranger told me I can trust them, it will not make me trust them more, but may even keep me alerted 🤣. So I think this tenet cannot guide us and cannot convince users. GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/opendal/discussions/5301#discussioncomment-11194839 ---- This is an automatically sent email for [email protected]. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected]
