Open Stack

Thanks for giving me a chance to vote.  I don't have any experience talking
to production/live Ironic using a client and only talk to my own devstack.
Personally I vote for a *no* (for such a 1.12) the reasons that have been
cited in the previous threads that

1) we need users to be aware of API versions (so I also would want them to
pin it if they wanted a stable one, so don't default in their automation
and keep testing and updating to the newer api versions)
2) it's already released, and i also tend to consider anything released
could already being used right now


On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Jim Rollenhagen <jim at jimrollenhagen.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 01:35:25PM -0700, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> >
> > Now we've landed a patch[0] with a new version (1.11) that is not
> > backward compatible. It causes newly added Node objects to begin life in
> > the ENROLL state, rather than AVAILABLE. This is a good thing, and
> > people should want this! However, it is a breaking change. Automation
> > that adds nodes to Ironic will need to do different things after the
> > node-create call.
> >
> > Our API versioning scheme makes this opt-in (by specifying the API
> > version). However, some folks have a problem with releasing this change
> > as-is. The logic is that we might release a client that defaults to 1.11
> > or higher, or the user may request 1.12 later to get a new feature, thus
> > breaking their application that enrolls nodes.
>
> So after much deliberation, we took an informal vote in IRC this morning
> between 5 out of our 9 cores.
>
> The question was: "should we do a 1.12 api version that allows the user
> to pick begining provision state in (AVAILABLE, ENROLL), defaulting to
> AVAILABLE?"
>
> The results were 3 for no, 2 for yes. So that's the plan.
>
> Other Ironic cores (Haomeng, Yuriy, Ramesh, Ruby): please chime in if
> you have opinions on this. :)
>
> Otherwise we'll be getting to work on releasing a server as-is in the
> next few days.
>
> // jim
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20150805/82f5e573/attachment.html>