On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 00:30 +0100, Monty Taylor wrote: > Sorry for the top post. I was asked to look at this thread and toss in > my €0.02 but I do not believe I could possibly read this whole thread - > I'm too jet lagged. So... > > As a current large-scale production consumer of the API, I don't care at > all as long as python-novaclient keeps working at the Python Library API > level. I do not care about the REST api specifics at all. I would > imagine that most Java folks only care that jclouds works. I would > imagine that most Ruby users would only care that fog works. Since > jclouds already supports a billion apis, I doubt supporting v2 and v3 > would be hard for them. > > AND > > As long as the v2/v3 switch is discoverable by the library and I don't, > as a consumer of the library, need to know about it - so that > python-novaclient will continue to support client operations on both > REST versions - I'm fine with that - because I want to continue to be > able to operate the old Diablo-based HP cloud, the new trunk HP cloud, > the trunk Rackspace cloud and the TripleO cloud with the same scripts. > > That's what I want. I'm sure other people want other things.
This is exactly what I want as well. -jay _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
