You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jclouds.apache.org by Reijhanniel Jearl Campos <de...@apache.org> on 2016/02/16 14:58:48 UTC
ProfitBricks provider promotion
Hi!
It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1] started,
and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly
configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I
think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and the
use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
provider. :)
Thanks!
RJ
[1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
[2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
[3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
[4] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
[5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
[6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
Re: ProfitBricks provider promotion
Posted by Reijhanniel Jearl Campos <de...@apache.org>.
Hi!
I'm about to promote ProfitBricks provider from the labs to the main repo.
Once promoted, you'll have to update the groupId of the profitbricks
dependency as follows:
org.apache.jclouds.labs -> org.apache.jclouds.provider
Those subscribed to the notifications@ list should expect some commit
message spam, as I'll preserve the commit history.
RJ
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:06 AM anthony shaw <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> It changes every minor version (the API) the models in the API responses
> are inconsistent, the behaviours are inconsistent. It smells like an API
> that's about to get an overhaul.
> List x entity has different names for fields than get x entity everywhere
> in the API meaning deserialisations are a nightmare.
> So you need to maintain n-3 minor versions in order to have some sort of
> stability.
> It's a sad state of affairs because they just see the API as the
> communication mechanism for their command line tool, which they have
> complete control over.
>
> Sent from Outlook Mobile
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:14 PM -0800, "Ignasi Barrera" <na...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Docker is stable, but the main concern is how fast they deploy new versions
> of the api and which level of backwards compatibility they have. Does our
> current version work with the latest api?
>
> I don't really know how up to date the provider is, as I'm not an active
> user. Perhaps some users can share their thoughts, or we can ping them at
> the IRC channel if they don't show up here.
>
> Anyway, the fast api releases is something we can't control, so IMO it
> doesn't male sense to retain Docker in labs just for that reason. Given its
> current stable status, I'd say we can promote it too.
> El 16/2/2016 6:39 p. m., "Andrea Turli" escribió:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Speaking of promotions, can we consider jclouds-docker as mature as
> > profitbricks ?
> >
> > Best,
> > Andrea
> >
> > Il giorno mar 16 feb 2016 18:33 Ignasi Barrera ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's
> > complete
> > > with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it!
> > > El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos"
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1]
> > started,
> > > > and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now
> properly
> > > > configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the
> labs, I
> > > > think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
> > > >
> > > > For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5],
> and
> > > the
> > > > use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
> > > >
> > > > With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
> > > > provider. :)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > RJ
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
> > > > [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
> > > > [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
> > > > [4]
> > > https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
> > > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
> > > > [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: ProfitBricks provider promotion
Posted by anthony shaw <an...@gmail.com>.
It changes every minor version (the API) the models in the API responses are inconsistent, the behaviours are inconsistent. It smells like an API that's about to get an overhaul.
List x entity has different names for fields than get x entity everywhere in the API meaning deserialisations are a nightmare.
So you need to maintain n-3 minor versions in order to have some sort of stability.
It's a sad state of affairs because they just see the API as the communication mechanism for their command line tool, which they have complete control over.
Sent from Outlook Mobile
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:14 PM -0800, "Ignasi Barrera" <na...@apache.org> wrote:
Docker is stable, but the main concern is how fast they deploy new versions
of the api and which level of backwards compatibility they have. Does our
current version work with the latest api?
I don't really know how up to date the provider is, as I'm not an active
user. Perhaps some users can share their thoughts, or we can ping them at
the IRC channel if they don't show up here.
Anyway, the fast api releases is something we can't control, so IMO it
doesn't male sense to retain Docker in labs just for that reason. Given its
current stable status, I'd say we can promote it too.
El 16/2/2016 6:39 p. m., "Andrea Turli" escribió:
> +1
>
> Speaking of promotions, can we consider jclouds-docker as mature as
> profitbricks ?
>
> Best,
> Andrea
>
> Il giorno mar 16 feb 2016 18:33 Ignasi Barrera ha
> scritto:
>
> > ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's
> complete
> > with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it!
> > El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos"
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1]
> started,
> > > and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly
> > > configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I
> > > think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
> > >
> > > For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and
> > the
> > > use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
> > >
> > > With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
> > > provider. :)
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > RJ
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
> > > [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
> > > [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
> > > [4]
> > https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
> > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
> > > [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
> > >
> >
>
Re: ProfitBricks provider promotion
Posted by Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>.
Docker is stable, but the main concern is how fast they deploy new versions
of the api and which level of backwards compatibility they have. Does our
current version work with the latest api?
I don't really know how up to date the provider is, as I'm not an active
user. Perhaps some users can share their thoughts, or we can ping them at
the IRC channel if they don't show up here.
Anyway, the fast api releases is something we can't control, so IMO it
doesn't male sense to retain Docker in labs just for that reason. Given its
current stable status, I'd say we can promote it too.
El 16/2/2016 6:39 p. m., "Andrea Turli" <an...@gmail.com> escribió:
> +1
>
> Speaking of promotions, can we consider jclouds-docker as mature as
> profitbricks ?
>
> Best,
> Andrea
>
> Il giorno mar 16 feb 2016 18:33 Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> ha
> scritto:
>
> > ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's
> complete
> > with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it!
> > El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos" <de...@apache.org>
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1]
> started,
> > > and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly
> > > configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I
> > > think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
> > >
> > > For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and
> > the
> > > use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
> > >
> > > With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
> > > provider. :)
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > RJ
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
> > > [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
> > > [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
> > > [4]
> > https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
> > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
> > > [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
> > >
> >
>
Re: ProfitBricks provider promotion
Posted by Andrea Turli <an...@gmail.com>.
+1
Speaking of promotions, can we consider jclouds-docker as mature as
profitbricks ?
Best,
Andrea
Il giorno mar 16 feb 2016 18:33 Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's complete
> with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it!
> El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos" <de...@apache.org>
> escribió:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1] started,
> > and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly
> > configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I
> > think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
> >
> > For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and
> the
> > use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
> >
> > With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
> > provider. :)
> >
> > Thanks!
> > RJ
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
> > [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
> > [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
> > [4]
> https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
> > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
> > [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
> >
>
Re: ProfitBricks provider promotion
Posted by Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>.
ProfitBricks is one of the most mature providers in labs and it's complete
with regard to the compute abstraction, so I'd say promote it!
El 16/2/2016 2:58 p. m., "Reijhanniel Jearl Campos" <de...@apache.org>
escribió:
> Hi!
>
> It's now a year (and a month) since the ProfitBricks provider[1] started,
> and so far ComputeService live tests are passing[2] and is now properly
> configured[3]. With the profitbricks-rest[4] in progress in the labs, I
> think it would make sense to now promote this provider.
>
> For completeness, non-blocking related issues are JCLOUDS-1058[5], and the
> use of cloud-init ready images[6] (if available).
>
> With that said, I was hoping to receive a go signal to promote this
> provider. :)
>
> Thanks!
> RJ
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks
> [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
> [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/224
> [4] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/tree/master/profitbricks-rest
> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1058
> [6] https://botbot.me/freenode/jclouds/msg/60156332/
>