libcloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Polvi <>
Subject Re: [libcloud] Proposal: remove zope interfaces from libcloud.
Date Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:30:37 GMT
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Tom Davis <> wrote:
>> we aren't really using them for anything
> Well, they *should* be used to validate a driver, as was the original
> intent.

We use verifyObject a bunch:

I have not found it that useful. It only seems to check that it has
the "implements(IBlah)" clause and does not actually do any sort of
internal object introspection. Maybe I am using it wrong, but it seems
like testing the interfaces with normal unit tests would do the same

> If this isn't implemented it would be trivial to add tests for this
> purpose. It also allows us to automate discovery / validation of drivers
> rather than manually list them out in some module that needs to be edited
> each time one is added or removed (which was also an initial intention
> though meant to be added later on).

How would auto discovery work with zope?

> I think the value-add of both documenting and validating a driver actually
> eases the development of them, not complicates it.

I feel like we could just document the base class. The testing stuff,
as mentioned above, does not seem to be that big of a win.

While I love the idea of interfaces, I'm not 100% sold it is that big
of a win over just solid, well documented, base classes coupled with a
good test suite.  It was great when we had *no* structure... but now
we have a solid set of base classes which seem to be working well.


> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jeremy Orem <> wrote:
>> Right now we have a zope interface dependency. I'd like to remove this,
>> because:
>> * we aren't really using them for anything
>> * they can be a little confusing to people who haven't used zope
>> interfaces elsewhere
>> * documenting libcloud with sphinx isn't so automatic when interfaces
>> are being used
>> * we haven't made a release, so right now would be a great time to remove
>> them
>> Is anyone opposed to this?
>> Thanks,
>> Jeremy

541 231 0624

View raw message