On 04/11/2012 11:03 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
I do not think that these pieces of middleware belong in the core swift repo.
1) Including them in swift would require swift to depend on keystone for full
testing.
2) (When the middleware was created) Keystone's API was in a state of constant
flux. Keystone has changed quite a bit since then, so this may not be the case
anymore.
3) Swift does not require Keystone to run (and in fact many production
environments don't use keystone at all). [1]
4) We have previously removed auth systems from swift's core code in order to
simplify the codebase and allow separate dev cycles. All that is included now
is the most basic auth system required for dev work, stand-alone tests, and POC
deployments.
Our thought thus far has been that auth systems providing auth for swift have
the responsibility to maintain their integration code. It's not swift's
responsibility to manage and maintain code for every auth system that wants to
provide an auth mechanism for swift.
That being said, there has been quite a bit of recent conversation about the
concept of *-contrib areas for each project that include optional
add-ons/extensions/plugins/etc or alternative APIs for each project. I expect
these conversations to continue next week in person at the summit. One option
is for the swift keystone middleware to be a part of such a contrib area.
It sounds like there are good reasons for both projects to not want to include
these pieces of middleware in their respective core repos. Perhaps a contrib
area can be a compromise, but that does not answer who is responsible for it
(ie who maintains the code?). I think that's a separate, but related, question.
I think this is an excellent solution -- the contrib area/project. And
as far as who should be responsible for it, I believe that the
responsibilities should be shared across the relevant projects that may
be integrated. For instance, recently Chmouel did a great job working
with the Keystone contributors to hammer out the Swift keystone
middleware and worked with the Glance contributors to make requisite
changes in the Glance Swift storage driver... so a number of affected
parties shared responsibility.
Best,
-jay
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
