On 10/24/2014 03:29 PM, Mike Perez wrote: > On 09:11 Thu 23 Oct , Flavio Percoco wrote: >> According to the use-cases explained in this thread (also in the emails >> from John and Mathieu) this is something that'd be good having. I'm >> looking forward to seeing the driver completed. >> >> As John mentioned in his email, we should probably sync again in K-1 to >> see if there's been some progress on the bricks side and the other >> things this driver depends on. If there hasn't, we should probably get >> rid of it and add it back once it can actually be full-featured. > > I'm unsure if Brick [1] will be completed in time. With that in mind, even if > we were to deprecate the glance driver for Kilo, Brick will likely be done by > then and we would just be removing the deprecation in L, assuming the driver > is > completed in L. I think that would be confusing to users. It's unfortunate > this > was merged in the current state, but I would just say leave things as is with > intentions at the latest to have the driver completed in L. If we're afraid no > one is going to complete the driver, deprecate it now. > > [1] - https://github.com/hemna/cinder-brick
Thanks, Mike. This is great feedback. I wonder how strong is the dependency between the cinder driver and bricks. I mean, it'd be cool if we could complete the implementation in a perhaps not so optimized way - on top of cinder's API? - and then use the bricks library when it's done. Thoughts on the above? It sounds hacky, I know. :) Cheers, Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
