On 12/06/2013 01:53 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 23:37 +0000, Douglas Mendizabal wrote: >>> >>> I agree that this is concerning. And that what's concerning isn't so >>> much that the project did something different, but rather that choice >>> was apparently made because the project thought it was perfectly fine >>> for them to ignore what other OpenStack projects do and go off and do >>> its own thing. >>> >>> We can't make this growth in the number of OpenStack projects work if >>> each project goes off randomly and does its own thing without any >>> concern for the difficulties that creates. >>> >>> Mark. >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> You may have missed it, but barbican has added a blueprint to change our >> queue to use oslo.messaging [1] >> >> I just wanted to clarify that we didn’t choose Celery because we thought >> that “it was perfectly fine to ignore what other OpenStack projects do”. >> Incubation has been one of our goals since the project began. If you’ve >> taken the time to look at our code, you’ve seen that we have been using >> oslo.config this whole time. We chose Celery because it was >> >> a) Properly packaged like any other python library, so we could just >> pip-install it. >> b) Well documented >> c) Well tested in production environments >> >> At the time none of those were true for oslo.messaging. In fact, >> oslo.messgaging still cannot be pip-installed as of today. Obviously, had >> we know that using oslo.messaging is hard requirement in advance, we would >> have chosen it despite its poor distribution story. > > I do sympathise, but it's also true is that all other projects were > using the oslo-incubator RPC code at the time you chose Celery. > > I think all the verbiage in this thread about celery is just to > reinforce that we need to be very sure that new projects feel a > responsibility to fit closely in with the rest of OpenStack. It's not > about technical requirements so much as social responsibility. > > But look - I think you've reacted well to the concern and hopefully if > it feels like there was an overreaction that you can understand the > broader thing we're trying to get at here.
I agree. I think you've done an excellent job in responding to it - and I appreciate that. We're trying to be clearer about expectations moving forward, which I hope this thread in some part helps with. Monty _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
