On Aug 28, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Jorge Williams wrote: > I strongly disagree with the idea of us maintaining multiple same-language > bindings for a single service. This is going lead to confusion and additional > work.
I guess we'll have to agree to strongly disagree. :) In my mind, one would write the low-level bindings first and then the high-level bindings which would just wrap the low-level ones in a more abstracted way; so I guess I don't really see the additional work. As far as confusion, I don't see confusion around an ORM using a lower-level DB-API/JDBC driver. Providing both is useful. If you provide the ORM and not the driver, that's frustrating. But, honestly, if there are no official low-level bindings for Swift in Python, I'll definitely be maintaining my own. See swift/common/client.py for the boiler-plate I don't want to have to repeat each time. Now maybe client.py is the type of bindings you're talking about and I'm just misinterpreting your idea as even higher-level. In that case, I'm arguing about the wrong thing. :) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
