Open Stack

This (http://paste.openstack.org/show/604775/) is absolutely perfect. I 
feel like the format could work for microversions as well. Anyone from 
Neutron or another microversion project that could weigh in?

Another great thing about this, is we can use this API version history 
to determine project age, which again is a manual thing we're doing 
right now.

Thanks!! Would love to hear others opinions on this?
> Brian Rosmaita <mailto:rosmaita.fossdev at gmail.com>
> March 29, 2017 at 9:23 PM
> On 3/29/17 12:55 AM, Jimmy McArthur wrote:
> [snip]
>
> See what you think of these. They add an "apis" section to the glance
> section of projects.yaml in the governance repo.
>
> http://paste.openstack.org/show/604775/ has a complete history, where
> for each release, the complete set of versions of the API that are
> available in that release (and their statuses) are listed.
>
> http://paste.openstack.org/show/604776/ has an abbreviated history,
> where only the changes in available APIs are listed from version to
> version, and if there's no change, the release isn't listed at all.
>
> I don't know if this format would work for microversions, though. (And
> I don't know if it's a good idea in the first place.)
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
> Jimmy McArthur <mailto:jimmy at openstack.org>
> March 28, 2017 at 11:55 PM
>
> Brian,
>
> Thanks for the response. This is a tough one. Currently we're pulling 
> API data manually for each project. That is no longer tenable when 
> we're talking about 40+ projects. Plus, this is info is something that 
> is really sought after by the community. Some thoughts below:
>> Brian Rosmaita <mailto:rosmaita.fossdev at gmail.com>
>> March 28, 2017 at 10:25 PM
>> On 3/27/17 5:01 PM, Lauren Sell wrote:
>> I don't have a helpful recommendation here, but the version history 
>> for Glance is incorrect as well. We maintain a version history in the 
>> glance api-ref [0], but that's probably not much help (and, as you 
>> point out, is idiosyncratic to Glance anyway). At this point, though, 
>> my primary concern is that it's showing a deprecated API version as 
>> the latest release. What format would it be useful for you to get 
>> this data in?
> What we really need is the following:
>
> * A project history, including the date of project inception that's 
> included in the TC tags.
> * An API history in an easily digestible format that all projects 
> share. So whether you're doing micro releases or not, just something 
> that allows us to show, based on a release timeline, which API 
> versions per project are applicable for each OpenStack release. This 
> really needs to be consistent from project to project b/c at the 
> moment everyone handles it differently.
>> thanks,
>> brian
>>
>> [0]
>> https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/image/versions/index.html#version-history
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
> Brian Rosmaita <mailto:rosmaita.fossdev at gmail.com>
> March 28, 2017 at 10:25 PM
> On 3/27/17 5:01 PM, Lauren Sell wrote:
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>
>>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 3:50 PM, Matt Riedemann<mriedemos at gmail.com>  wrote:
> [snip]
>>> 2. The "API Version History" section in the bottom right says:
>>>
>>> "Version v2.1 (Ocata) - LATEST RELEASE"
>>>
>>> And links to https://releases.openstack.org/<https://releases.openstack.org/>. The latest compute microversion in Ocata was actually 2.42:
>>>
>>> https://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/api_microversion_history.html<https://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/api_microversion_history.html>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering how we can better sort that out. I guess "API Version History" in the navigator is meant more for major versions and wasn't intended to handle microversions? That seems like something that should be dealt with at some point as more and more projects are moving to using micro versions.
>> Agreed, we could use some guidance here. From what we can tell, each team logs these a little bit differently, so there's no easy way for us to pull them. Could we output the correct link as a tag for each project, or does anyone have a recommendation?
>
> I don't have a helpful recommendation here, but the version history for
> Glance is incorrect as well.  We maintain a version history in the
> glance api-ref [0], but that's probably not much help (and, as you point
> out, is idiosyncratic to Glance anyway).  At this point, though, my
> primary concern is that it's showing a deprecated API version as the
> latest release.  What format would it be useful for you to get this data in?
>
> thanks,
> brian
>
> [0]
> https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/image/versions/index.html#version-history
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170330/760809e8/attachment.html>