Open Stack

We manage a fairly large nova-baremetal installation at Yahoo. And while we've developed tools to hit the nova-bm API, we're planning to move to ironic without any support for the nova BM API. Definitely no interest in the proxy API from our end. 
Sometimes you just need to let a thing die. 
-James
 :)= 

     On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 12:51 PM, Ben Nemec <openstack at nemebean.com> wrote:
   

 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/10/2014 02:26 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>> 1) Is this tested anywhere?  There are no unit tests in the patch
>> and it's not clear to me that there would be any Tempest coverage
>> of this code path.  Providing this and having it break a couple
>> of months down the line seems worse than not providing it at all.
>> This is obviously fixable though.
> 
> AFAIK, baremetal doesn't have any tempest-level testing at all
> anyway. However, I don't think our proxy code breaks, like, ever. I
> expect that unit tests for this stuff is plenty sufficient.

Right, but this would actually be running against Ironic, which does
have Tempest testing.  It might require some client changes to be able
to hit a Baremetal API instead of Ironic though.

> 
>> 2) If we think maintaining compatibility for existing users is
>> that important, why aren't we proxying everything?  Is it too 
>> difficult/impossible due to the differences between Baremetal
>> and Ironic?  And if they're that different, does it still make
>> sense to allow one to look like the other?  As it stands, this
>> isn't going to let deployers use their existing tools without
>> modification anyway.
> 
> Ideally we'd proxy everything, based on our current API
> guarantees. However, I think the compromise of just the show/index
> stuff came about because it would be extremely easy to do, provide
> some measure of continuity, and provide us a way to return
> something nicer for the create/update operations than a 500. It
> seemed like a completely fair and practical balance.

Fair enough.  I'm still not crazy about it, but since it already
exists and you say these interfaces don't require much maintenance I
guess that takes care of my major concerns.

- -Ben
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUEKsAAAoJEDehGd0Fy7uqM3YIAKaqJPCwyS1l3NoKhj7qmGlT
wqdPspI2LyVgnHY62iq73O6FSpmEp0JzEcuBxHi21gK3tIBrvRr+mOsNtGNoj7Of
84YmcFyWgBR75rRDSLLnVu7rs1LJ0jpGwVzWDi/vmzVoxWdNXwSx223mQTwi9gJ3
n+Rgf0HYOKUwGgDVDpyWFv1DUBo/Hgc3ZdG8pzwnEqONN0bmRlBQMZRJrl2+8Jvj
zTYxDmunWp8FbTdKE80JcQ1YQYjmg4anCzaH0MEwax+j6lxu8MwEtM61ISJ7vV3L
KqTSW2OrjtqKY/9oHSnKiBuD9RInyWhML6pq8jsniadPw+TOatJ4PZaCyTS9XvI=
=cSmK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
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/20140911/42ad60dc/attachment-0001.html>