On 11/24/2015 07:27 AM, Dougal Matthews wrote:


On 24 November 2015 at 07:45, Richard Su <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:



    On 11/17/2015 07:31 AM, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------



        On 10 November 2015 at 15:08, Tzu-Mainn Chen
        <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

            Hi all,

            At the last IRC meeting it was agreed that the new
            TripleO REST API
            should forgo the Tuskar name, and simply be called... the
            TripleO
            API.  There's one more point of discussion: where should
            the API
            live?  There are two possibilities:

            a) Put it in tripleo-common, where the business logic
            lives.  If we
            do this, it would make sense to rename tripleo-common to
            simply
            tripleo.


        +1 - I think this makes most sense if we are not going to
        support the tripleo repo as a library.


    Okay, this seems to be the consensus, which is great.

The leftover question is how to package the renamed repo. 'tripleo' is already intuitively in use by tripleo-incubator.
    In IRC, bnemec and trown suggested splitting the renamed repo
    into two packages - 'python-tripleo' and 'tripleo-api',
    which seems sensible to me.

    What do others think?



    I have started the process of renaming the repo with these patches:
    https://review.openstack.org/#/c/247834/
    https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/252864/

    Jan made an interesting suggestion that it may be easier to create
    a new repo named tripleo and move the tripleo-common code there.
    With renaming, I'm already see some complications with the
    tripleo-common package builds failing in the CI until updated spec
    is merged.

    What do folks think about this? I am unsure which is more
    complicated, creating a new repo and all the setup that goes with
    it. Or renaming the existing repo and fixing CI issues along the way.


I'm not sure which is easier or better, but if we do create a new repo we need to make sure we carry over the git history.

Good idea. I have submitted a request to create the new repo.

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249521/


    - Richard


            b) Put it in its own repo, tripleo-api


            The first option made a lot of sense to people on IRC, as
            the proposed
            API is a very thin layer that's bound closely to the code
            in tripleo-
            common.  The major objection is that renaming is not
            trivial; however
            it was mentioned that renaming might not be *too* bad...
            as long as
            it's done sooner rather than later.

            What do people think?


            Thanks,
            Tzu-Mainn Chen

            
__________________________________________________________________________
            OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
            Unsubscribe:
            [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
            
<http://[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
        <mailto:[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
    <mailto:[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://[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

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to