+1 to Doug's comments. On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Doug Hellmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sep 16, 2014, at 6:02 PM, Flavio Percoco <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 09/16/2014 11:55 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: >>> Based on my reading of the wiki page about this it sounds like it should >>> be a sub-project of the Storage program. While it is targeted for use >>> by multiple projects, it's pretty specific to interacting with Cinder, >>> right? If so, it seems like Oslo wouldn't be a good fit. We'd just end >>> up adding all of cinder-core to the project anyway. :-) >> >> +1 I think the same arguments and conclusions we had on glance-store >> make sense here. I'd probably go with having it under the Block Storage >> program. > > I agree. I’m sure we could find some Oslo contributors to give you advice > about APIs if you like, but I don’t think the library needs to be part of > Oslo to be reusable. > > Doug > >> >> Flavio >> >>> >>> -Ben >>> >>> On 09/16/2014 12:49 PM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: >>>> Hi Stackers! >>>> >>>> I'm working on moving Brick out of Cinder for K release. >>>> >>>> There're a lot of open questions for now: >>>> >>>> - Should we move it to oslo or somewhere on stackforge? >>>> - Better architecture of it to fit all Cinder and Nova requirements >>>> - etc. >>>> >>>> Before starting discussion, I've created some proof-of-concept to try it. I >>>> moved Brick to some lib named oslo.storage for testing only. It's only one >>>> of the possible solution to start work on it. >>>> >>>> All sources are aviable on GitHub [1], [2]. >>>> >>>> [1] - I'm not sure that this place and name is good for it, it's just a >>>> PoC. >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/e0ne/oslo.storage >>>> [2] https://github.com/e0ne/cinder/tree/brick - some tests still failed. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Ivan Kolodyazhny >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Ivan Kolodyazhny <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All! >>>>> >>>>> I would to start moving Cinder Brick [1] to oslo as was described on >>>>> Cinder mid-cycle meetup [2]. Unfortunately I missed meetup so I want be >>>>> sure that nobody started it and we are on the same page. >>>>> >>>>> According to the Juno 3 release, there was not enough time to discuss [3] >>>>> on the latest Cinder weekly meeting and I would like to get some feedback >>>>> from the all OpenStack community, so I propose to start this discussion on >>>>> mailing list for all projects. >>>>> >>>>> I anybody didn't started it and it is useful at least for both Nova and >>>>> Cinder I would to start this work according oslo guidelines [4] and >>>>> creating needed blueprints to make it finished until Kilo 1 is over. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderBrick >>>>> [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-meetup-summer-2014 >>>>> [3] >>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-September/044608.html >>>>> [4] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Oslo/CreatingANewLibrary >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Ivan Kolodyazhny. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >> >> >> -- >> @flaper87 >> Flavio Percoco >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-- Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
