One of the goals of neutron-lib is to reduce the chances of a code change in neutron core breaking other repos. We want to get to a point where no repo imports anything from neutron core.
So if there is some value shared between neutron core and one or more other repos, then the value should go in neutron-lib. Your question seems to be around "neutron reference implementation", but I don't think that is relevant to what goes into neutron-lib. You could argue that the values in neutron_lib/constants.py are big mix of unrelated items, and that we may want to divide them up into separate <foo>_constants.py modules. But then I could argue that would proliferate the number of imports required for many repos. Gal Sagie <gal.sa...@gmail.com> wrote: > For example references to the various different agents which are an > implementation details to me > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Henry Gessau <hen...@gessau.net > <mailto:hen...@gessau.net>> wrote: > > Gal Sagie <gal.sa...@gmail.com <mailto:gal.sa...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I have recently came across some missing constants in neutron-lib and > sent > > a patch but i wanted to try and understand the scope of the lib. > > > > I see that the Neutron lib consist of many definitions which are > actually > > part of the reference implementation and are not really "generic" > Neutron > > parts. > > Can you give specific examples of 'not really generic' constants? > > > I am wondering if this is the right approach, especially since i think > an > > end goal is to split between the two (some day..) > > > > My suggestion would be to at least split these two in the neutron-lib, > but maybe > > i miss understood the scope of the lib __________________________________________________________________________ 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
