On Mon, May 23, 2016, at 11:48 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2016-05-23 17:07:36 +0100: > > On Mon, 23 May 2016, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2016-05-20 14:16:15 +0100: > > >> I don't think language does (or should) have anything to do with it. > > >> > > >> The question is whether or not the tool (whether service or > > >> dependent library) is useful to and usable outside the openstack-stack. > > >> For example gnocchi is useful to openstack but you can use it with other > > >> stuff, therefore _not_ openstack. More controversially: swift can be > > >> usefully used all by its lonesome: _not_ openstack. > > >
Making a tool which is useful outside of the OpenStack context just seems like good software engineering - it seems odd that we would try and ensure our tools do not fit this description. Fortunately, many (or even most) of the tools we create *are* useful outside of the OpenStack world - pbr, git-review, diskimage-builder, (I hope) many of the oslo libraries. This is really a question of defining useful interfaces more than anything else, not a statement of whether a tool is part of our community. > > > Add keystone, cinder, and ironic to that list. > > > > Hmmm. You can, but would people want to (that is, would it be a sound > > choice?)? Or _do_ people? Maybe that's the distinction? As far as I > > Yes, I'm aware of cases of each of those projects being used without > "the rest" of OpenStack. I used keystone like that to secure some > internal APIs myself. > This has become a very popular way of using Ironic as well. We even have an OpenStack project (bifrost) which is used to deploy Ironic in this fashion. Cheers, Greg __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
