Open Stack

On 1 June 2015 at 14:11, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/06/15 13:30 +0100, John Garbutt wrote:
>> On 1 June 2015 at 13:10, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 01/06/15 11:57 +0100, John Garbutt wrote:
>>> I'm happy you brought this up. What are Nova's plans to adopt Glance's
>>> v2 ? I heard there was a discussion and something along the lines of
>>> creating a library that wraps both APIs came up.
>>
>> We don't have anyone who has stepped up to work on it at his point.
>>
>> I think the push you made around this effort in kilo is the latest
>> updated on this:
>>
>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/kilo/approved/remove-glanceclient-wrapper.html
>>
>> It would be great if we could find a glance/nova CPL to drive this effort.
>
> So, unless the library is proposed and some magic happens, is it safe
> to assume that the above spec is still valid and that folks can work
> on it?

Well it will need re-approving for Liberty, but we can get that done
very quickly.

I am assuming Jay is pushing this now, which is cool.

Let me know how I can help there.

>>> Where can I find more info about this?
>>
>> I suspect it will be included on our liberty priority TODO list, that
>> I am yet to write, but I expect to appear here:
>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/
>>
>>> I really think nova should put some more effort on helping this
>>> happen. The work I did[0] - all red now, I swear it wasn't - during
>>> Kilo didn't get enough attention even before we decided to push it
>>> back. Not a complain, really. However, I'd love to see some
>>> cross-project efforts on making this happen.
>>> [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144875/
>>
>>
>> As there is no one to work on the effort, we haven't made it a
>> priority for liberty.
>>
>> If someone is able to step up to help complete the work, I can do my
>> best to help get that effort reviewed, by raising its priority, just
>> as we did in Kilo.
>
> IIRC, the patch wasn't far from being ready.

I think we reviewed this at the mid cycle.
Basically the patch needs splitting up into little chunks, where possible.
Anyways, lets not get distracted here.

>The latest patch-sets
> relied on the gate to run some tests and the biggest issue I had -
> still have - is that this script[0] didn't even use glanceclient but
> direct http calls. The issue, to be precises, is that I didn't have
> ways to test it locally, which made the work painful.

Its possible to test it locally, using opensource software, but its a
painful setup process.

> If there's a way to do it - something that has already being asked -
> it'd be great.
>
> This said, I'm not sure how much time I'll have for this but I'm
> trying to find someone that could help out.
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144875/30/plugins/xenserver/xenapi/etc/xapi.d/plugins/glance,cm

I offered to help with that at the mid cycle, but I figured it got
fixed already, because no one reached out. Sorry, I mean to reach out
to you to check, but I totally forgot.

I don't have the time now I am afraid. Nikhil or I should be able to
find someone at Rackspace to help out with that. Its important.

>> I suspect looking at how to slowly move towards v2, rather than going
>> for a "big bang" approach, will make this easier to land. That and
>> solving how we implement "changed-since", if thats not available in
>> the newer glance APIs. Honestly, part of me wonders about skipping v2,
>> and going straight to v3.
>
> Regardless, I think we should enable people to run on a v2 only
> deployment. Not a crazy thought, I think. We'll have to think this
> through a bit more.

Agreed its important and needs doing.

Happy to see some signs of progress again.

Thanks,
John