#2
On 02/05/2016 02:24 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
