Hi, At the moment private methods are used all over the place. Examples for this are the address pairs and the security groups. If you do a grep of the ML2 plugin you will see these innocent private methods being used. The end goal would be for us to have these as public methods. Thanks Gary
On 1/12/16, 11:52 AM, "Smigiel, Dariusz" <dariusz.smig...@intel.com> wrote: > > >> Doug Wiegley <doug...@parksidesoftware.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> On Jan 11, 2016, at 2:42 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Sean M. Collins <s...@coreitpro.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>>> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 07:50:47AM PST, Chris Dent wrote: >> >>>>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Gary Kotton wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> The commit >> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openstack_neutron_commit_5d53dfb8d64186-2D&d=BQICAg&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=VlZxHpZBmzzkWT5jqz9JYBk8YTeq9N3-diTlNj4GyNc&m=JeGcqDfJO3uBpHFJtMpFdfKGvUvygEhoI7bztB14S9w&s=6QRgfZxiJsf6Mgon-2G_2DUSuUWXKQED2HH38t_TGz8&e= >> >>>>> >> >>>>> b5b1d2f356fbff8f222e15d1b2 may break the decomposed plugins that >> >>>>> make use of the method _get_tenant_id_for_create >> >>>> >> >>>> Just out of curiosity, is it not standard practice that a plugin >> >>>> shouldn't use a private method? >> >>> >> >>> +1 - hopefully decomposed plugins will audit their code and look for >> >>> other calls to private methods. >> >> >> >> The fact that it broke *aas repos too suggests that we were not >> >> showing a proper example to those decomposed. I think it can be >> >> reasonable to restore the method until N, with a deprecation message, >> >> as Garry suggested in his patch. Especially since there is no actual >> >> burden to keep the method for another cycle. >> > >> > The neutron community has been really lax about enforcing private >> methods. >> > And while we should absolutely reverse that trend, likely we should >> > give some warning. I agree with not going whole hog on that until N. >> > >> > I'd suggest putting in a debtcollector reference when putting the method >> back. >> >> Done. https://review.openstack.org/265315 > > >Do we have any consensus about treating private methods? Any general tips >about it, or every time should it be left for author decision? > >Should we use deprecation warning for all refactored private methods, treating >it as "API" and rewriting underneath code? > >Thanks, Dariusz (dasm) Smigiel > >__________________________________________________________________________ >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 __________________________________________________________________________ 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
