> On May 2, 2015, at 10:28, Monty Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 05/01/2015 09:16 PM, Jamie Lennox wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> At around the time Barbican was applying for incubation there was a >> discussion about "supported" WSGI frameworks. From memory the decision >> at the time was that Pecan was to be the only supported framework and >> that for incubation Barbican had to convert to Pecan (from Falcon). >> >> Keystone is looking to ditch our crusty old, home-grown wsgi layer for >> an external framework and both Pecan and Falcon are in global >> requirements. >> >> In the experimenting I've done Pecan provides a lot of stuff we don't >> need and some that just gets in the way. To call out a few: >> * the rendering engine really doesn't make sense for us, for APIs, and >> where we are often returning different data (not just different views or >> data) based on Content-Type. >> * The security enforcement within Pecan does not really mesh with how >> we enforce policy, nor does the way we build controller objects per >> resource. It seems we will have to build this for ourselves on top of >> pecan >> >> and there are just various other niggles. >> >> THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO START A DEBATE ON THE VIRTUES OF EACH FRAMEWORK. >> >> Everything I've found can be dealt with and pecan will be a vast >> improvement over what we use now. I have also not written a POC with >> Falcon to know that it will suit any better. >> >> My question is: Does the ruling that Pecan is the only WSGI framework >> for OpenStack stand? I don't want to have 100s of frameworks in the >> global requirements, but given falcon is already there iff a POC >> determines that Falcon is a better fit for keystone can we use it? > > a) Just to be clear - I don't actually care > > That said: > > falcon is a wsgi framework written by kgriffs who was PTL of marconi who > has since being involved with OpenStack. My main perception of it has > always been as a set of people annoyed by openstack doing their own > thing. That's fine - but I don't have much of a use for that myself. > > pecan is a wsgi framework written by Dreamhost that eventually moved > itself into stackforge to better enable collaboration with our community > after we settled on it as the API for things moving forward. > > Since the decision that new REST apis should be written in Pecan, the > following projects have adopted it: > > openstack: > barbican > ceilometer > designate > gnocchi > ironic > ironic-python-agent > kite > magnum > storyboard > tuskar > > stackforge: > anchor > blazar > cerberus > cloudkitty > cue > fuel-ostf > fuel-provision > graffiti > libra > magnetodb > monasca-api > mistral > octavia > poppy > radar > refstack > solum > storyboard > surveil > terracotta > > On the other hand, the following use falcon: > > stachtach-quincy > zaqar >
To me this is a strong indicator that pecan will see more eyes and possibly be more open to improvement to meet the general need. > That means that for all of the moaning and complaining, there is > essentially one thing that uses it - the project that was started by the > person who wrote it and has since quit. > > I'm sure it's not perfect - but the code is in stackforge - I'm sure we > can improve it if there is something missing. OTOH - if we're going to > go back down this road, I'd think it would be more useful to maybe look > at flask or something else that has a large following in the python > community at large to try to reduce the amount of special we are. > +1 > But honestly - I think it matters almost not at all, which is why I keep > telling people to just use pecan ... basically, the argument is not > worth it. > Monty > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
