[openstack-dev] [glance] Removing python-swiftclient from requirements.txt

Kuvaja, Erno kuvaja at hp.com
Tue Jul 28 09:15:24 UTC 2015

I do agree, we don't depend or are cleaning the other clients out of the glance dependencies as well and I think swift should not be there either.

The default store is filesystem store and if something is depending on the actual store clients it should be either glance_store or deployer (well for example our gate) glance itself should not have hard dependencies for 'em.

-          Erno

From: William M Edmonds [mailto:edmondsw at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 10:42 PM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
Subject: [openstack-dev] [glance] Removing python-swiftclient from requirements.txt

python-swiftclient is only needed by operators that are using the swift backend, so it really doesn't belong in requirements.txt. Listing it in requirements forces all operators to install it, even if they're not going to use the swift backend. When I proposed a change [1] to move this from requirements to test-requirements (would still be needed there because of tests using the swift backend), others raised concerns about the impact this could have on operators who use the swift backend today and would be upgrading to Liberty. I believe everyone agreed this should not be in requirements, but the fact is that it has been, so operators may have (incorrectly) been depending on that during upgrades. If we remove it in Liberty, and there are changes in Liberty that require a newer version of swiftclient, how would those operators know that they need to upgrade swiftclient?

The optional dependencies spec [2] could definitely help here. I don't think we should have to wait for that, though. This is an issue we obviously already have today for other backends, which indicates folks can deal with it without an optional dependencies implementation.

This would be a new concern for operators using the default swift backend, though. So how do we get the message out to those operators? And do we need to put out a message about this change in Liberty and then wait until Mitaka to actually remove this, or can we go ahead and remove in Liberty?

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/203242
[2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/liberty/optional-deps.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150728/a90e24ea/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list