On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Roald van Loon <roaldvanloon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I most definitely agree, that's why I think a lightweight and > extensible solution would be best. No big interface description but > just a simple loader function with parameters depending on the type of > 'plugin'. If we need another type of plugin, we can add that later on > (of course, we have to be extra careful not to make a mess of things > and end up having to define another plugin type for every single > plugin). That way we can end up having the best of both ways; modular > and flexible. > > What do you think would be the best way to start? Probably to define > types of plugins? I can think of two types of plugins right now: > > - "API" (REST APIs): S3, Swift, (GS?) etc I think that for this to actually work out we'd need to provide a stable internal api, which I think that at this point would be quite a big task. > - "AUTH" (Authentication backends): Rados/internal, Keystone That's probably the best place to start. > > Implementing these will mostly require moving some code around. That > would be doable IMHO. If we have at least the basic plugin framework > up&running, people can start writing their stuff in plugins (instead > of keeping a bunch of patches laying around like I do because they > make no sense in the current monolithic code base). > > I think we can do this without tying our hands behind our backs. And > as longs as we keep it to simply moving existing code into plugins > instead of adding new code until we have a plugin system with which we > can live with, we can always go back without breaking functionality. > > Roald > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Yehuda Sadeh <yehuda@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Roald van Loon <roaldvanloon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> For those interested; >>> http://wiki.ceph.com/01Planning/02Blueprints/Emperor/rgw:_plugin_architecture >>> >>> I know a plugin architecture is a sensitive subject for a lot of >>> people (it is for me at least), but I think it might be worthwhile >>> discussing it. >>> >>> Please comment/flame away :-) >>> >> >> I'm all for having a modular architecture. In essence this is >> something we've been aiming at although the interfaces are not as >> clean and shiny as they should be. OTOH, there's the danger overdoing >> it and tying our hands behind our backs, so we need to be careful >> about what to get into a plugin/module, and what should stay as it is >> now (flexible, albeit monolithic). >> >> Yehuda -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
