Open Stack

Great. Thanks Dolph..

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Dolph Mathews <dolph.mathews at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Great question!
>
> For some backstory, the community interest in supporting XML has always
> been lackluster, so the XML translation middleware has been on a slow road
> of decline. It's a burden for everyone to maintain, and only works for
> certain API calls. For the bulk of Keystone's documented APIs, XML support
> is largely untested, undocumented, and unsupported. Given all that, I
> wouldn't recommend anyone deploy the XML middleware unless you *really*
> need some aspect of it's tested functionality.
>
> In both Icehouse and Juno, we shipped the XML translation middleware with
> a deprecation warning, but kept it in the default pipeline. That was
> basically my fault, because both Keystone's functional tests and tempest
> are hardcoded to expect XML support, and we didn't have time during
> Icehouse to break those expectations... but still wanted to communicate out
> the fact that XML was on the road to deprecation.
>
> So, to remedy that, we have now have a bunch of patches (thanks for your
> help, Lance!) which complete the work we started back in Icehouse.
>
> Tempest:
> - Make XML support optional https://review.openstack.org/#/c/126564/
>
> Devstack:
> - Make XML support optional moving forward
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/126672/
> - stable/icehouse continue testing XML support
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/127641/
>
> Keystone:
> - Remove XML support from keystone's default paste config (this makes lxml
> truly a test-requirement) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130371/
> - (Potentially) remove XML support altogether
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/125738/
>
> The patches to Tempest and Devstack should definitely land, and now we
> need to have a conversation about our desire to continue support for XML in
> Kilo (i.e. choose from the last two Keystone patches).
>
> -Dolph
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Xu (Simon) Chen <xchenum at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I am trying to understand why lxml is only in test-requirements.txt...
>> The default pipelines do contain xml_body and xml_body_v2 filters, which
>> depends on lxml to function properly.
>>
>> Since lxml is not in requirements.txt, my packaging system won't include
>> lxml in the deployment drop. At the same time, my environment involves
>> using browsers to directly authenticate with keystone - and browsers
>> (firefox/chrome alike) send "accept: application/xml" in their request
>> headers, which triggers xml_body to perform json to xml conversion, which
>> fails because lxml is not there.
>>
>> My opinion is that if xml_body filters are in the example/default
>> paste.ini file, lxml should be included in requirements.txt.
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141024/1a0d01bb/attachment.html>