On Mon, Nov 18 2013, Eric Windisch wrote: Hi Eric,
> I agree with Mark that a clear blueprint and plan should be outlined. > I'm not happy with the blueprint as written, it is sparse, outlining > your intention, rather than a plan of attack. I'd really like to know > what the plan of attack here is, how this will affect the > oslo.messaging API, what it will look like once complete. It > shouldn't break the public API and if for some reason you don't think > it is possible to keep that contract, it should be discussed. I think that some part of the API where a configuration object is expected will have to be changed to have proper keywords argument instead. It'll likely slightly break the current API though it should be easy to add a compatibility layer. > Personally, I'd be happy with a wiki page outlining these changes, > linked to from the blueprint. Sure, I'll try to describe that. > Also, I've noticed that your blueprint is registered underneath > Ceilometer. Once you move or recreate the blueprint, please email the > list with the updated URL. Facepalm. Probably clicked in the wrong window. Recreated in the right project: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/messaging-decouple-cfg -- Julien Danjou # Free Software hacker # independent consultant # http://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
