Let's follow the standard procedure. Both blueprints lack specification of implementation details. There also has to be someone willing to implement these blueprints in near feature.
I'm not opposed to these ideas and I'd really like to see Pecan added during Juno, but we still need to follow the procedure. I cannot approve an idea, it should be a specification. Let's work together on the new API specification first, then we'll need to find a volunteer to implement it on top of Pecan. -- Ruslan On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Timur Nurlygayanov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > We need to rewrite Murano API on new API framework and we have the commit: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60787 > (Sergey, sorry, but -1 from me, need to fix small isses) > > Also, today I created blueprint: > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/murano/+spec/murano-api-workers > this feature allows to run many API threads on one host and this allows to > scale Murano API processes. > > I suggest to update and merge this commit with migration to Pecan framework > and after that we can easily implement this blueprint and add many other > improvements to Murano API and Murano python agent. > > Ruslan, could you please approve these blueprints and target them to some > milestone? > > > Thank you! > > -- > > Timur, > QA Engineer > OpenStack Projects > Mirantis Inc > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
