Folks. This happened again. Nailgun’s API was silently changed [1] breaking python-fuelclient and everything else that was relying on it.
I feel like this is the point when just discussing the issue is not enough so I call for a vote: Let’s separate Nailgun from Fuel UI and put them into different repositories now. Please cast your votes (either +1 or -1) to this thread. You can also provide your reasoning and more thoughts. - romcheg 1. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/240234/ <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/240234/> > 26 жовт. 2015 р. о 11:11 Sebastian Kalinowski <skalinow...@mirantis.com> > написав(ла): > > 2015-10-23 11:36 GMT+02:00 Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com > <mailto:ikalnit...@mirantis.com>>: > Roman, Vitaly, > > You're both saying right things, and you guys bring a sore topic up again. > > The thing is that Nailgun's API isn't the best one.. but we're trying > to improve it step-by-step, from release to release. We have so many > things to reconsider and to fix that it'd require a huge effort to > make backward compatible changes and support it. So we decided ignore > backward compatibility for clients for awhile and consider our API as > unstable. > > I agree with Roman that such changes must not be made secretly, and we > should at least announce about them. Moreover, every core must think > about consequences before approving them. > > So I propose to do the following things when backward incompatible > change to API is required: > > * Announce this change in openstack-dev ML. > * Wait 1 week before approving it, so anyone can prepare. > * Change author has to work with QA in order make sure they are > prepared for this change. > > Any thoughts? > > > +1. > > Although there is one thing that you didn't mention (but probably everyone > know about it) > is to solve the issue with fuelclient not beign tested against changes in > nailgun. > We need not only run it for every change in nailgun (or for only those that > touch files under "api" > dir) but also cover more endpoints with fuelclient tests against real API, > not mocks, to discover > such issues earlier. > > > Thanks, > Igor > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Vitaly Kramskikh > <vkramsk...@mirantis.com <mailto:vkramsk...@mirantis.com>> wrote: > > JFYI: (re-)start of this discussion was instigated by merge of this change > > (and here is revert). > > > > And this is actually not the first time when we make backward incompatible > > changes in our API. AFAIR, the last time it was also about the network > > configuration handler. We decided not to consider our API frozen, make the > > changes and break backward compatibility. So now is the time to reconsider > > this. > > > > API backward compatibility is a must for good software, but we also need to > > understand that introducing API versioning is not that easy and will > > increase efforts needed to make new changes in nailgun. > > > > I'd go this way: > > > > Estimate the priority of introducing API versioning - maybe we have other > > things we should invest our resources to > > Estimate all the disadvantages this decision might have > > Fix all the issues in the current API (like this one) > > Implement API versioning support (yes, we don't have this mechanism yet, so > > we can't just "bump API version" like Sergii suggested in another thread) > > Consider the current API as frozen v1, so backward incompatible changes (or > > maybe all the changes?) should go to v2 > > > > > > 2015-10-21 20:25 GMT+07:00 Roman Prykhodchenko <m...@romcheg.me > > <mailto:m...@romcheg.me>>: > >> > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> I’d like to touch the aspect of Fuel development process that seems to be > >> as wrong as possible. That aspect is how we change the API. > >> > >> The issue is that in Fuel anyone can change API at any point of time > >> without even warning the rest of the same component’s team. Relying on this > >> kind of API is basically impossible. We constantly have problems when even > >> components of Fuel stop working due to unexpected changes in the API. > >> Thinking about another software that must be integrated with Fuel is hardly > >> possible with the current approach. > >> > >> As for a grown-up project there is a strong need for Fuel in general and > >> for Nailgun in particular to work on a policy for making changes to their > >> APIs. Living in OpenStack ecosystem we must at least take a look how it’s > >> done in its components and try to do something similar. After working with > >> Nova, Keystone, Ironic and other components I would propose to start with > >> the following: let’s not make any changes to the API. Instead, let’s create > >> a new version of Nailgun’s API that will appear in Fuel 8.0 and make all > >> the > >> changes there. That is the thing that will instantaneously make lives of > >> other components much easier, if we make it now. > >> > >> After doing the essential part let’s think about how we are going to live > >> with that in the future. There are several APIs in Fuel, the rest of the > >> email is only touching Nailgun’s REST API. I can see the things somehow > >> like > >> the following: > >> > >> - Introduce API documentation by embedding Swagger and Swagger UI. > >> The current approach when we leave API docs for documentation team is > >> not effective. Swagger generates the documentation and resolves this issue. > >> - After releasing a version of Fuel, it’s API is called stable and frozen > >> for any changes, unless they allign API to the documentation or > >> documentation to the API. > >> - All changes to a stable APIs must be backported to the stable version > >> of Fuel that introduced the corresponding API. > >> - In order to guarantee that a stable API is not changed, Jenkins jobs > >> should make automatic checks for every new patch set > >> > >> Details about all the above mentioned proposals can be discussed in > >> separate threads so this one will stay uncluttered. I'd like to also summon > >> those OpenStack folks, who tried to resolve the same issue and ask them > >> about any common solutions in the ecosystem. > >> > >> > >> - romcheg > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> __________________________________________________________________________ > >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > >> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Vitaly Kramskikh, > > Fuel UI Tech Lead, > > Mirantis, Inc. > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > > <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org > <mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
