On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Zhang <zhang.lei.fly at gmail.com> wrote: > We introduced customization solution. > > Now, we support two format of footer. > > 1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }} > 2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %} > > there two conflict about this now[0][1]. > > I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution. > > [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746 > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253 > > -- > Regards, > Jeffrey Zhang > Blog: http://xcodest.me > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > I tend towards #2, patchset [0] is corresponding to a discussion on #openstack-kolla and if we keep #2, we need to keep #1 in all dockerfiles with a deprecation warning for next cycle. Also what if user specifies both the footer blocks? We need to confirm we ignore #1 if #2 is chosen.