Thank you Jesse for your valuable input (here and at the summit) as well
as intent to clarify the discussion.
Just trying to ensure people are aware about the EXPERIMENTAL nature of
the v3 API and reasons behind it. Please find my responses in-line.
However, I do want to ensure you all, that we will strive hard to move
away from the EXPERIMENTAL nature and go with a rock solid
implementation as and when interest grows in the code-base (that helps
stabilize it).
On 5/26/15 12:57 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
On 5/22/15, 4:28 PM, "Nikhil Komawar" <nik.koma...@gmail.com
<mailto:nik.koma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
tl;dr; Artifacts IS staying in Glance.
1. We had a nice discussion at the contributors' meet-up at the
Vancouver summit this morning. After weighing in many
possibilities and evolution of the Glance program, we have
decided to go ahead with the Artifacts implementation within
Glance program under the EXPERIMENTAL v3 API.
Want to clarify a bit here. My understanding is: s/Artifacts/v3 API/g.
That is to say, Artifacts is the technical implementation of the v3
API. This also means the v3 API is an objects API vs just an images API.
Generic "data assets'" API would be a nice term along the lines of the
mission statement. Artifacts seemed fitting as that was the focus of
discussion at various sessions.
We also had some hallway talk about putting the v1 and v2 APIs on top
of the v3 API. This forces faster adoption, verifies supportability
via v1 and v2 tests, increases supportability of v1 and v2 APIs, and
pushes out the need to kill v1 API.
Let's discuss more as time and development progresses on that
possibility. v3 API should stay EXPERIMENTAL for now as that would help
us understand use-cases across programs as it gets adopted by various
code-bases. Putting v1/v2 on top of v3 would be tricky for now as we may
have breaking changes with code being relatively-less stable due to
narrow review domain.
1.
2. The effort would primarily be conducted as a sub-team-like
structure within the program and the co-coordinators and
drivers of the necessary Artifacts features would be given
core-reviewer status temporarily with an informal agreement to
merge code that is only related to Artifacts.
3. The entire Glance team would give reviews as time and
priorities permit. The approval (+A/+WorkFlow) of any code
within the program would need to come from core-reviewers who
are not temporarily authorized. The list of such individuals
and updated time-line would be documented in phases during the
course of Liberty cycle.
4. We will continue to evaluate & update the governance, maturity
of the code and future plans for the v1, v2 and v3 Glance APIs
as time progresses. However, for now we are aiming to
integrate all of Glance (specifically Images) as Artifacts in
the v3 API.
As I understand it, that is to say that v3 requests in the first
“micro-version” that specify the object type as image would get a not
implemented or similar error. The next next “micro-version” would
likely contain the support for images along with possibly implementing
the v1 and v2 APIs on top of v3.
As we will have EXPERIMENTAL v3 API, we should try to avoid
micro-versions. However, we should soon consider this as a possibility
once things seem to stabilize.
1.
Special thanks to Flavio for providing DefCore and TC perspective
as well as initializing this discussion. Also, thanks to Stuart
McLaren and Brian Rosmaita for giving us thoughtful veteran
feedback. The entire team did a great job at putting all their
questions and concerns amicably on the table and came to a good
understanding of the plan and level of commitment.
All the best to the Project SearchLight team who have decided to
start ElasticSearch based development for search functionality in
OpenStack as a separate program and would be porting respective
code out of Glance. Glance team would help co-ordinate this
porting effort in order to avoid destabilizing Images and MetaDefs
code-bases.
This also means we will re-evaluate some of the existing spec
proposals and most likely not ask people for radical changes in
their approach. This first phase of the Liberty cycle would focus
on seeing the Experimental Artifacts API through. We will also
focus on stability aspects of the Images (v1 & v2) related
features. The second phase priorities would be decided at the
mid-cycle meet-up (details to come out soon).
Feel free to ask me questions on IRC or via email.
Cheers,
Nikhil
__________________________________________________________________________
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
Cheers,
Nikhil
__________________________________________________________________________
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
