Thx mark, good to know this happens before it is librarized. Is there any place
where these common set of refactoring tasks is written down (so that info can
be referred to instead of a question on the mailing list)?
Sent from my really tiny device...
On Aug 21, 2013, at 10:20 PM, "Mark McLough
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 01:14 +, Joshua Harlow wrote:
> Agreed, any thoughts from the oslo folks on how this could be done
> (without a major refactoring??). Can it even be done?
>
> It will be a continuous problem for libraries which want to be
> integrated with the various openstack projects,
t Mailing List
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 5:59 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Oslo.db] Configuration options
Josh thanks for highlighting this. This exa
Josh thanks for highlighting this. This example is a good reason why oslo
libraries should decouple their useful bits from any configuration
assumptions. Much of the code already allows use without requiring you to
adopt configuration code. But we should make all of it like that.
On Wed, Aug 21,
Another question related to making oslo.db a pypi library and relevant to how
taskflow is used.
Currently taskflow has a persistence layer, its using a copy of oslo-incubator
db module to do this.
That copied code (soon to be library I hope) has the following:
db_opts = [
cfg.StrOpt('backe