On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote:
> > On Jan 16, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Jesse Noller <jesse.nol...@rackspace.com> > wrote: > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:22 PM, Renat Akhmerov <rakhme...@mirantis.com> > wrote: > > Since it’s pretty easy to get lost among all the opinions I’d like to > clarify/ask a couple of things: > > > - Keeping all the clients physically separate/combining them in to a > single library. Two things here: > - In case of combining them, what exact project are we considering? > If this list is limited to core projects like nova and keystone what > policy > could we have for other projects to join this list? (Incubation, > graduation, something else?) > - In terms of granularity and easiness of development I’m for > keeping them separate but have them use the same boilerplate code, > basically we need a OpenStack Rest Client Framework which is flexible > enough to address all the needs in an abstract domain agnostic manner. I > would assume that combining them would be an additional organizational > burden that every stakeholder would have to deal with. > > > Keeping them separate is awesome for *us* but really, really, really sucks > for users trying to use the system. > > > I agree. Keeping them separate trades user usability for developer > usability, I think user usability is a better thing to strive for. > 100% agree with this. In order for OpenStack to be its most successful, I believe firmly that a focus on end-users and deployers needs to take the forefront. That means making OpenStack clouds as easy to consume/leverage as possible for users and tool builders, and simplifying/streamlining as much as possible. I think that a single, common client project, based upon package namespaces, with a unified, cohesive feel is a big step in this direction. -- Jonathan LaCour
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
