On Aug 4, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 08/04/2014 09:09 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
>> Duncan Thomas
>> On Aug 1, 2014 9:44 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypi...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > Yup. Though I'd love for this code to live in olso, not glance...
>> Why Oslo? There seems to be a general obsession with getting things into
>> Oslo, but our (cinder team) general experiences with the end result have
>> been highly variable, to the point where we've discussed just saying no
>> to Oslo code since the pain is more than the gain. In this case, the
>> glance team are the subject matter experts, the glance interfaces and
>> internals are their core competency, I honestly can't see any value in
>> putting the project anywhere other than glance
> 2 reasons.
> 1) This is code that will be utilized by >1 project, and is a library, not a 
> service endpoint. That seems to be right up the Oslo alley.
> 2) The mission of the Glance program has changed to being an application 
> catalog service, not an image streaming service.
> Best,
> -jay

Oslo isn’t the only program that can produce reusable libraries, though. If the 
Glance team is going to manage this code anyway, it makes sense to leave it in 
the Glance program.


OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to