Open Stack

Erno and I have had this discussion in the hallway at the PTGs before,
so my response should be no surprise.

The Octavia client is exclusively an OpenStack Client (OSC) plugin.
This is partly because python-neutronclient (octavia was a neutron
sub-project at the time) was already deprecated, but also because we
saw the advantages and much improved user experience with OSC.
We also exclusively use OSC for our devstack plugin scripts, etc. This
includes interacting with glance[1].

Personally I have also moved to exclusively using OSC for my
development work. I load/delete/show/tag images in glance on a daily
basis. From my perspective, the basic features of glance work well, if
not better due to the standardized output filtering/formatting
support.

So, I am an advocate for the OpenStack Client work and have
contributed to it[2].

I also understand that glance has some development resource
constraints. So, I have a few questions for the glance team:
1. Do we have RFEs for the feature gaps between the python-glanceclient and OSC?
2. Do we have a worklist that prioritizes these RFEs in order of use?
3. Do we have open stories for any OSC issues that may impact the above RFEs?

If so, can you reply to this list with those links?

I think there are folks here offering to help or enlist help to
resolve these issues.

Michael

[1] https://github.com/openstack/octavia/blob/master/devstack/plugin.sh#L48
[2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/662859/

On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 10:24 AM Albert Braden
<Albert.Braden at synopsys.com> wrote:
>
> Sean, thank you for clarifying that.
>
>
>
> Was my understanding that the community decided to focus on the unified client incorrect? Is the unified/individual client debate still a matter of controversy? Is it possible that the unified client will be deprecated in favor of individual clients after more discussion? I haven’t looked at any of the individual clients since 2018 (except for osc-placement which is kind of a special case), because I thought they were all going away and could be safely ignored until they did, and I haven’t included any information about the individual clients in the documentation that I write for our users, and if they ask I have been telling them to not use the individual clients. Do I need to start looking at individual clients again, and telling our users to use them in some cases?
>
>
>
> We are on Rocky now but I expect that we will upgrade as necessary to stay on supported versions.
>
>
>
> From: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 9:50 AM
> To: openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: OSC future (formerly [glance] Different checksum between CLI and curl)
>
>
>
> On 3/3/20 11:28 AM, Albert Braden wrote:
>
> Am I understanding correctly that the Openstack community decided to focus on the unified client, and to deprecate the individual clients, and that the Glance team did not agree with this decision, and that the Glance team is now having a pissing match with the rest of the community, and is unilaterally deciding to continue developing the Glance client and refusing to work on the unified client, or is something different going on? I would ask everyone involved to remember that we operators are down here, and the yellow rain falling on our heads does not smell very good.
>
> I definitely would not characterize it that way.
>
> With trying not to put too much personal bias into it, here's what I would say the situation is:
>
> - Some part of the community has said OSC should be the only CLI and that individual CLIs should go away
> - Glance is a very small team with very, very limited resources
> - The OSC team is a very small team with very, very limited resources
> - CLI capabilities need to be exposed for Glance changes and the easiest way to get them out for the is by updating the Glance CLI
> - No one from the OSC team has been able to proactively help to make sure these changes make it into the OSC client (see bullet 3)
> - There exists a sizable functionality gap between per-project CLIs and what OSC provides, and although a few people have done a lot of great work to close that gap, there is still a lot to be done and does not appear the gap will close at any point in the near future based on the current trends
>