Le 20/06/2016 16:04, Jay Pipes a écrit :
On 06/17/2016 11:23 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
+1000 yes to that. Now the devil could be in the details, in particular
how we implement the WSGI server, the corresponding WSGI app and the
associated routing, and that's exactly the problem below.
We shouldn't be implementing a WSGI server *at all*. The fact that one
cannot run Nova inside a true WSGI server (i.e. Apache/mod_wsgi,
uwsgi, etc) is a bad thing.
Okay, fair point :-)
That still leaves the routing question up, tho :-)
I certainly understand the concerns of adding yet another library. To be
honest, I tend to even agree with the statement that we could possibly
use Routes without explicitly use nova.wsgi, right ?
In the review, you explain why you don't trust Routes and I respect
that. That said, are those issues logged as real problems for our API
consumers, which are mostly client libraries that we own and other
projects we know, like Horizon ?
If that is a problem for those, is there something we could improve,
instead of just getting rid of it ?
For the record, I'm very much in favor of the approach Chris has taken
in a framework-less implementation with nothing other than the (tiny)
selector library as a dependency. I'd like to see the work move forward.
Okay, my open question (because I'm not expert in that) was rather to
understand why Routes was not possible to be something usable for the
new placement API, if that's something we use in Nova too.
-S
Best,
-jay
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
