On 2014-12-12 4:40 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
While there is a good case for the UX of unique names - it also makes
orchestration via tools like puppet a heck of a lot simpler - the fact is that
most OpenStack resources do not require unique names. That being the case, why
would we want security groups to deviate from this convention?
Maybe the other ones are the broken ones?
Honestly, any sanely usable system makes names unique inside a
container. Like files in a directory. In this case the tenant is the
container, which makes sense.
It makes as much sense as a filesystem accepting 2 files in the same
folder with the same name but allows you to distinguish them by their
OpenStack-dev mailing list