On 02/05/2016 02:09 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 08:38 AM, Dean Troyer wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Chris Dent <cdent...@anticdent.org
>> <mailto:cdent...@anticdent.org>> wrote:
>>
>> I think this discussion is dancing around the edges of a
>> referendum on
>> the "duplication" aspect of the big tent.
>>
>> It is also dancing around the separation of 'API' from
>> 'implementation'. There is a long-standing disagreement on whether
>> OpenStack APIs can/should stand on their own, or simply be defined as
>> 'whatever project Foo implements'.
>
> I think you know my opinion on this matter :)
>
> My belief is that we should have a single curated, consistent, and
> governed OpenStack API, a reference implementation of that API, and the
> ability to have competing implementations of that API to encourage
> innovation.
I feel like this is gone a bit "dead horse" of track from the question
at hand. Which brings us in danger of ending up on solution #3 (do
nothing, we're all burned out from having to discuss things anyway, lets
farm goats).
I'd ask for folks to try to stay on the original question:
What possible naming standards could we adopt, and what are the preferences.
>From that we can move towards any implementation needed for that.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
