-----Original Message----- From: Eoghan Glynn <egl...@redhat.com> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Date: Thursday, July 10, 2014 at 3:30 PM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Treating notifications as a contract
> > >> The original implementation of the notification system was never >>intended >> to be the *final* implementation. I think we all identified the need for >> versioning several years ago. As for backwards compatibility, I think >>the >> version field itself, in whatever form it takes, should be optional. If >> not provided, it can be assumed the body of the notification is >>freeform. > >Fair point. > >> Adding fields is easy. Removal of fields should only occur after we can >> comfortably say that all services are only consuming the new field and >> we¹ve left sufficient time for deprecating the old ones. > >Put on the deprecation path, then eventually bump the version when the old >field finally goes away, right? Yessir :-) > >> In some capacity, I think PubSubHubBub has a lot to offer here. The >> publisher has to be able to provide a list of feeds it¹s authoritative >> for, which I think is sufficient for discovery. I think PSHB itself is >>bit >> heavy weight for what we need (and has some scaling problems) but I >>think >> the concept itself is very useful for us. > >Note to self: learn more about PSHB. > >> >> 4. external discoverability of which event types a service is >>consuming >> > >> >Isn't this what the topic queues are for? Consumers should only >> >subscribe to the topics they're interested in >> >> I¹m not sure I understand the value of this one. A service consumes what >> it consumes. If we¹ve versioned correctly, as mentioned above, why does >>it >> matter? > >Yes, as I said in other responses on this thread, the potential usefulness >of that is rapidly receding in my mind. Sorry, I’ve been away and hadn’t read the entire thread yet. Didn’t mean to rehash an existing point. > >Cheers, >Eoghan > >_______________________________________________ >OpenStack-dev mailing list >OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
