On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:40:16AM +0100, Thomas Herve wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Steven Hardy <sha...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > So, Zane and I have discussed $subject and it was suggested I take this to > > the list to reach consensus. > > > > Recently, I've run into a couple of small but inconvenient limitations in > > our intrinsic function implementations, specifically for str_replace and > > repeat, both of which did not behave the way I expected when referencing > > things via get_param/get_attr: > > Disclaimer: compatibility is not black and white, especially in these > cases. We need to make decisions based on the impact we can imagine on > users, so it's certainly subjective. That said: > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1539737 > > I think it works fine as a bug fix.
Ok, I've followed up on Zanes comments re the fix here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/282394/ And squashed both patches as a backport to stable/liberty: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/282403/ > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1546684 > > I agree that a new version would be better. > > The main difference for me is that even if it's arguable, you could > build a working template relying on the current behavior (having a > template returned by a function). > If you find a way to keep the current behavior *and* have the one you > expect, then I can see it as a bug fix. Yeah, given the feedback here, on the review and in the bug, I've abandoned the patch and will submit a spec instead so we can work through the interface concerns and figure out a backwards-compatible way to do it. Thanks! Steve __________________________________________________________________________ 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
