On 2 February 2015 at 16:29, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote:

> It's really easy to say "someone should do this", but the problem is
> that none of the core team is interested, neither is anyone else. Most
> of the people that once were interested have left being active in
> OpenStack.
>
> EC2 compatibility does not appear to be part of the long term strategy
> for the project, hasn't been in a while (looking at the level of
> maintenance here). Ok, we should signal that so that new and existing
> users that believe that is a core supported feature realize it's not.
>
> The fact that there is some plan to exist out of tree is a bonus,
> however the fact that this is not a first class feature in Nova really
> does need to be signaled. It hasn't been.
>
> Maybe deprecation is the wrong tool for that, and marking EC2 as
> experimental and non supported in the log message is more appropriate.
>

I think that perhaps something that shouldn't be lost site of is that the
users using the EC2 API are using it as-is. The only commitment that needs
to be made is to maintain the functionality that's already there, rather
than attempt to keep it up to scratch with newer functionality that's come
into EC2.

The stackforge project can perhaps be the incubator for the development of
a full replacement which is more up-to-date and interacts more like a
translator. Once it's matured enough that the users want to use it instead
of the old EC2 API in-tree, then perhaps deprecation is the right option.

Between now and then, I must say that I agree with Sean - perhaps the best
strategy would be to make it clear somehow that the EC2 API isn't a fully
tested or up-to-date API.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to