Excerpts from Monty Taylor's message of 2018-01-10 17:40:28 -0600: > On 01/10/2018 04:10 PM, Jon Schlueter wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 4:12 PM, gordon chung <g...@live.ca> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 2017-11-22 04:18 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Now that the Ceilometer API is gone, we really don't need > >>> ceilometerclient anymore. I've proposed a set of patches to retire it: > >>> > >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/522183/ > >>> > > > > > > So my question here is are we missing a process check for retiring a > > project that is still in > > the requirements of several other OpenStack projects? > > > > I went poking around and found that rally [4], heat [1], aodh [3] and > > mistral [2] still had references to > > ceilometerclient in the RPM packaging in RDO Queens, and on digging a > > bit more they > > were still in the requirements for at least those 4 projects. > > > > I would think that a discussion around retiring a project should also > > include at least enumerating > > which projects are currently consuming it [5]. That way a little bit > > of pressure on those consumers > > can be exerted to evaluate their usage of an about to be retired > > project. It shouldn't stop the > > discussions around retiring a project just a data point for decision making. > > It's worth pointing out that openstacksdk has ceilometer REST API > support in it, although it is special-cased since ceilometer was retired > before we even made the service-types-authority: > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/python-openstacksdk/tree/openstack/connection.py#n234 > > We can either keep it there indefinitely (there is no cost to keeping > it, other than that one "self._load('metric')" line) - or we could take > this opportunity to purge it from sdk as well. > > BUT - if we're going to remove it from SDK I'd rather we do it in the > very-near-future because we're getting closer to a 1.0 for SDK and once > that happens if ceilometer is still there ceilometer support will remain > until the end of recorded history. > > We could keep it and migrate the heat/mistral/rally/aodh > ceilometerclient uses to be SDK uses (although heaven knows how we test > that without a ceilometer in devstack) > > I honestly do not have a strong opinion in either direction and welcome > input on what people would like to see done. > > Monty >
If ceilometer itself is deprecated, do we need to maintain support in any of our tools? Doug __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
