Damn, I knew I should have trademarked the "OpenStack, Cloud's Big Tent" slogan!
Sent from my iPhone On 2011-06-04, at 10:37 AM, Bryan Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:14 AM, "Ed Leafe" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Jun 3, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Bryan Taylor wrote: >> >>> We've standardized on XML for backend work. We aren't spending much time >>> debugging serialization issues and are pretty happy with our decision and >>> aren't likly to change any time soon > > Our choice, for "backend" work, as one example of an openstack customer. > >> vs. >> >>> So the obvious thing to do is support both JSON and XML, which isn't that >>> hard. > > A product feature choice as a platform provider who has to support a > community. > >> >> I'm always confused when people claim that doing something is easy, but >> also that for them to do the same thing is too hard. > > Our internal policy is actually that XML is mandatory and other formats are > allowed and driven by customer request. I never said it was too hard for us > to support both, and when we look at the needs of the community of developers > - we see a vastly different layout than openstack does, with a much smaller > set of people. BTW, we ironically followed the Rackspace Cloud architecture > team's recommendation as cloud is the only major external integrator with us. > > We just signed a major contract with a SaaS vendor whose product will become > one of the pillars that runs Rackspace. They earned big points in the > integration category vs their competition because they uniformly output XML, > JSON, CSV, XLS via http and SOAP for each API. > >>> at the point they try to tell me how to implement my solutions, all it does >>> is annoy me, because format wars are annoying. >> >> I'm not sure if you intended it, but dismissing a discussion about taking >> on a significant chunk of work as nothing more than an annoying "format war" >> sounds rather condescending. We're not arguing the merits of of one over the >> other; we're deciding if we are going to commit to supporting XML right now, >> or perhaps add it later on. > > Ask the customers. This is a product feature - the question is demand vs > difficulty. Think of this decision the same way we decide what OS's to > support. > > And several posts (none from you) have approached it by touting technical > merits. There are certain religious area: OS, language, xml vs json where > tech merit discussions are just going to result in endless soul sucking > debate. > >> Everyone would love to support as many formats as possible. With limited >> resources, we need to narrow our focus. And since this is all open source, >> anyone who has a need and finds implementing the solution for that need >> isn't "that hard" is more than welcome to contribute. > > I wonder what your stance would be on a contribution that was XML only. Mine > would be the same - the feature isn't ready for inclusion in a release until > it is finished by meeting the API standards of supporting both. > > I'm pushing for more involvement by our devs in openstack, btw. As we scratch > our own itches as customers i have no problem expecting our contributions to > meet openstack coding standards. But before this happens we go through the > process of deciding to deploy openstack components, and components that speak > XML are attractive to us. Other customers prefer JSON and I'd like a big tent > where we all collaborate. > >> >> -- Ed Leafe >> > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
