[openstack-dev] [Heat] Support status of Heat resource types
shardy at redhat.com
Mon Jan 19 13:24:19 UTC 2015
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:29:42PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:49:08AM +0000, Steven Hardy wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 08:41:46PM +0800, Qiming Teng wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > > One question we constantly get from Heat users is about the support
> > > status of resource types. Some users are not well informed of this
> > > information so that is something we can improve.
> > >
> > > Though some resource types are already labelled with support status,
> > > there are quite some of them not identified yet. Helps are needed to
> > > complete the list.
> > Identifying any resources which were added in either Juno or Kilo which
> > aren't tagged appropriately seems worthwhile, but all other resources
> > should exist in any non EOL verion of heat, so is the effort justified in,
> > for example, saying "supported since grizzly"?
> Honestly speaking, I don't think we need to backtrace all the way to the
> day when worldwar II ended. The questions we got are mostly about the
> support status of resource types in Icehouse and Juno. What have been
> added? Which are deprecating/deprecated? So, I tend to agree that saying
> just 'supported since 2013.2' would suffice.
Ok, I'm not clear what there is to do here then, as AFAIK all resources
added during Juno and Kilo should be tagged already (if they're not, please
raise a bug).
> > A more important ommission IMO was that we didn't expose the properties
> > schema tags for new properties added to existing resources - I fixed that
> > on Friday:
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/147434/1
> Documenting the support status is important for sure, but I'm concerning
> that most users are just brave/confident enough to start with trying the
> command line. They even don't know there are docs. They start with
> simple templates and then experiment with each resource type they feel
> interested in.
I find this comment a little confusing given that the whole reason for this
thread is documenting support status ;)
That said, if users don't know there are docs, that's a serious problem, we
should add links somewhere obvious, like heat-templates in a README, if
that's where their simple templates are coming from, or maybe even add it
to the error response they see when we reject a template due to an unknown
More information about the OpenStack-dev