<div dir="ltr">I ran into this issue on my laptop where I had just pip installed glance client and gotten the latest version. The script I was working on I want to run in multiple environments, so it was easier to rely on the openstack client which has the same CLI API (and generally easier to integrate with) than to make it work with two versions of the glance client or to force a specific version on systems I may not control.<div><br></div><div>I don't remember the exact behavior change that bit me, but since it was trying to upload an image if it didn't already exist by name, I suspect that it was the --is-public/--is-protected change.</div><div><br></div><div>I think one of the issues here is that a lot of our users also install from pip, and from their standpoint this is an "unannounced" change. Not because it's literally unannounced, but because many of them probably don't install specific versions of the clients even though we do recommend specific versions. From their standpoint I think they consider this "unannounced" mostly because I doubt any of them follow any of the mailing lists where it would have been announced. I'm not sure what the right answer here is, but it's definitely a difficult situation.</div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Flavio Percoco <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:flavio@redhat.com" target="_blank">flavio@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 09/09/15 21:46 -0400, Clayton O'Neill wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I'd be glad to see the backwards compatibility parts go in. I got bitten by<br>
this earlier this week and ended up switching my scripts over to using the<br>
python-openstackclient library to work around it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br></span>
Hey Clayton,<br>
<br>
Thanks for the feedback.<br>
<br>
Could you be more precise on what incompatibility affected you?<br>
<br>
The patch that Nikhil linked in his email brings in several<br>
"compatibilities" with v1. I personally think they should be examined<br>
1 by 1 rather than pulling them all in, hence my question.<br>
<br>
Switching to python-openstack client must have required some effort<br>
and I'm curious to know why you decided to do that rather than<br>
adapting your scripts to use the v2 cli. Do you have Glance's v2<br>
deployed?<br>
<br>
Ideally, I think we should just move to use openstackclient, really.<br>
But glanceclient is what we have now and that's what the Glance team<br>
has focused on the most lately so I'd appreaciate as much feedback as<br>
possible from you and others.<br>
<br>
Thanks for your time,<br>
Flavio<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Nikhil Komawar <<a href="mailto:nik.komawar@gmail.com" target="_blank">nik.komawar@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
We recently release python-glanceclient 1.0.0 and it has the default<br>
shell version as v2. This may result into some scripts not detecting the<br>
change by default and discomfort to an extent.<br>
<br>
So, I am reaching out to this list with the hope of getting some<br>
feedback on the requirements, pros and cons you all think exist for<br>
adding some support for v1 like calls as hidden command to the default<br>
python-glanceclient shell API that is v2 centric by default. This should<br>
unbreak the scripts to an extent and give a warning to users to update<br>
the scripts in a stipulated time period so that they use the v2 API.<br>
<br>
Here's the proposed patch <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/219802/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/219802/</a> . We<br>
are not yet sure if we need to get it merged by tomorrow so that it can<br>
be in stable/liberty by the end of the week. There has been one request<br>
to get those in and the feedback we received from the developer<br>
community was neutral.<br>
<br>
In order to form an opinion on what's best for our users, we need some<br>
feedback on this topic. Please send us your thoughts as soon as possible<br>
and we will try to accommodate the same if permissible within the<br>
technical limitations:<br>
<br>
1. Whether you would like these commands added as hidden commands so<br>
that shell API works like before (to extent possible).<br>
2. You would like to use v2 shell API of the client by default and don't<br>
care about this commit.<br>
3. You don't care about the change. Your scripts are awesome and can<br>
adjust to the upgrade of the client easily.<br>
4. Anything else.<br>
--<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Nikhil<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-operators mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
-- <br>
@flaper87<br>
Flavio Percoco<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>