On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 12:48 -0400, Duncan McGreggor wrote: >> +1 :-) > > In all seriousness - Mark made two separate points. Which one are you > top-posting a +1 to?
Ah, sorry -- I'll be more explicit. Condensing my previous comments: if globals are in fact going to be used, I'm 100% in favor of a solution that defines an API around the use of globals such that there is a canonical way to access them and the proper means of accessing them is well documented in the various functions/methods that provide such access :-) d >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Mark Washenberger >> <mark.washenber...@rackspace.com> wrote: >> > Hi Mark, >> > >> > Please forgive the top-posting! I always get way too wordy with >> > inline replies. > > <point 1> > >> > Regarding configuration, I think there is another option I'd like us >> > to adopt. We should implement the code as in your option #1, but then >> > implement convenience factories that give the appearance of option #3 >> > or #2, or both, you pick. From your examples it might look something >> > like this: >> > >> > class Connection(object): >> > >> > def __init__(self, broker_hostname, broker_port): >> > self.cnx = self.connect(broker_hostname, broker_port) >> > >> > def cast(self, topic, msg): >> > self.cnx.cast(topic, msg) >> > >> > def connection_from_global_conf(): >> > return Connection(CONF.broker_hostname, CONF.broker_port) >> > >> > I think its pretty necessary that we don't do option #3 directly. >> > There are some important use cases to consider, like migrating from >> > one rpc implementation to another where you might want an adapter >> > that can relay messages from one to the other. Also, cells with >> > kombu at least requires that one process be able to talk to multiple >> > brokers. > > </point 1> > > <point 2> > >> > Regarding incubation, I suppose I am confused. At what point during >> > incubation do other projects start to use the shared library? I would >> > imagine the answer to be "after incubation" but it sounds like there >> > are several projects very eager to adopt rpc as soon as it lands in >> > openstack common, even before incubation is complete. >> > >> > If incubation happens before the calcifying effects of shared use >> > set in, then it sounds like a great place to address the other >> > rpc-specific concerns we've talked about. Otherwise I guess we're >> > stuck where I thought we were, where the bar needs to be set pretty >> > high to initially land in os-common. > > </point 2> > > Cheers, > Mark. > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
