Hi Oslo developers, It seems my latest patch¹ on oslo.messaging scared Mark, so I'll try to discuss it a bit on this mailing list as it is more convenient.
I've created a blueprint² as requested by Mark. That seems necessary since it will be spread on several patch. Now to the core. oslo.messaging API mixes usage of parameters and configuration file object. Such as you have to provide a configuration object for basic API usage, even if you don't have a configuration object. It seems to me that having this separation of concerns in oslo.messaging would be good idea. My plan is to move out the configuration object out of the basic object, like I did in the first patch. I don't plan to break the configuration handling or so, I just think it should be handled in a separate, individually testable part of the code. Ultimately, this would allow oslo.messaging to not be 'oslo' only, and just being friendly with oslo.config and therefore OpenStack. A goal I wish we'd had in more oslo library. :) If you think this is a bad idea, well, feel free to mark the blueprint as so and I'll drop the work. ¹ https://review.openstack.org/56068 ² https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/messaging-decouple-cfg -- Julien Danjou ;; Free Software hacker ; independent consultant ;; http://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
