Hello everyone, This is the first time that I post on the list so please accept my apologies if I come in "late" to the conversation.
I understand that Rackspace does not intend to add an EC2 implementation, or rather that it's not of importance to them. However, this is something that's important to us. It's nice that we have the OpenStack API, however, having the EC2 API will offer awesome cloud interoperability by having all API interfaces available to the OpenStack cloud (I don't think there's any major API but EC2's) We would love to go ahead and move on by continuing this feature, however, we want to see how we can reach an agreement on the instance names via the EC2 interface. It's important to keep the EC2 specification because I personally think the EC2 API is useless in the event that it's incompatible with the official API. I think we either put it in with 100% compatibility or we leave it out. With the option of having it in much more preferred if we can at least get to an agreement on instance names. Thanks! Mohammed On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Ewan Mellor <ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > Well, as long as it's not precluded by design choices that you're making, > then someone else can pick up the work and finish the job. No-one expects > Rackspace to do _everything_ -- that's what the other (*checks ever > increasing counters on openstack.org*) 82 companies and 1150 people are here > for! > > Ewan. > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
