Thanks for summarizing this Mark. What's the best way to get feedback about this to the TC? I'd love to see some of the items which I think are common sense for anyone who can't just blow away devstack and start over to get added for consideration.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Mark Voelker <mvoel...@vmware.com> wrote: > > Mark T. Voelker > > > > > On Sep 29, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Matt Fischer <m...@mattfischer.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree with John Griffith. I don't have any empirical evidences to back > > my "feelings" on that one but it's true that we weren't enable to enable > > Cinder v2 until now. > > > > Which makes me wonder: When can we actually deprecate an API version? I > > *feel* we are fast to jump on the deprecation when the replacement isn't > > 100% ready yet for several versions. > > > > -- > > Mathieu > > > > > > I don't think it's too much to ask that versions can't be deprecated > until the new version is 100% working, passing all tests, and the clients > (at least python-xxxclients) can handle it without issues. Ideally I'd like > to also throw in the criteria that devstack, rally, tempest, and other > services are all using and exercising the new API. > > > > I agree that things feel rushed. > > > FWIW, the TC recently created an assert:follows-standard-deprecation tag. > Ivan linked to a thread in which Thierry asked for input on it, but FYI the > final language as it was approved last week [1] is a bit different than > originally proposed. It now requires one release plus 3 linear months of > deprecated-but-still-present-in-the-tree as a minimum, and recommends at > least two full stable releases for significant features (an entire API > version would undoubtedly fall into that bucket). It also requires that a > migration path will be documented. However to Matt’s point, it doesn’t > contain any language that says specific things like: > > In the case of major API version deprecation: > * $oldversion and $newversion must both work with > [cinder|nova|whatever]client and openstackclient during the deprecation > period. > * It must be possible to run $oldversion and $newversion concurrently on > the servers to ensure end users don’t have to switch overnight. > * Devstack uses $newversion by default. > * $newversion works in Tempest/Rally/whatever else. > > What it *does* do is require that a thread be started here on > openstack-operators [2] so that operators can provide feedback. I would > hope that feedback like “I can’t get clients to use it so please don’t > remove it yet” would be taken into account by projects, which seems to be > exactly what’s happening in this case with Cinder v1. =) > > I’d hazard a guess that the TC would be interested in hearing about > whether you think that plan is a reasonable one (and given that TC election > season is upon us, candidates for the TC probably would too). > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/207467/ > [2] > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/tags/assert_follows-standard-deprecation.rst#n59 > > At Your Service, > > Mark T. Voelker > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > 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-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
