On December 9, 2014 at 10:43:51 AM, Adam Young (ayo...@redhat.com) wrote:
On 12/09/2014 10:57 AM, Brad Topol wrote:
+1!  Makes sense.


Brad Topol, Ph.D.
IBM Distinguished Engineer
(919) 543-0646
Internet:  bto...@us.ibm.com
Assistant: Kendra Witherspoon (919) 254-0680

From:        Morgan Fainberg <morgan.fainb...@gmail.com>
To:        Adam Young <ayo...@redhat.com>, "OpenStack Development Mailing List 
(not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date:        12/08/2014 06:07 PM
Subject:        Re: [openstack-dev] [Keystone] OSAAA-Policy

I agree that this library should not have “Keystone” in the name. This is more 
along the lines of pycadf, something that is housed under the OpenStack 
Identity Program but it is more interesting for general use-case than 
exclusively something that is tied to Keystone specifically.

openstack-policy?  osid-policy?  It really should not position itself as a 
standard.  pycadf is more general purpose, but we are not looking to replace 
all of the rules languages out there.

Just keep in mind we’re a policy rules enforcement library (with whatever name 
we end up with). This is obviously one of the hard computer science issues 
(naming things).

I wasn’t clear, I didn’t mean to imply usage would be like pycadf (a more 
global standard), but just that it was not exclusive (at least within the 
OpenStack world) to be used with Keystone.


OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to