Open Stack

On 06/15/2015 01:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 06/15/2015 01:07 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> It has come to my attention in [1] that the microversion spec for Nova
>> [2] and Ironic [3] have used the project name -- i.e. Nova and Ironic --
>> instead of the name of the API -- i.e. "OpenStack Compute" and
>> "OpenStack Bare Metal" -- in the HTTP header that a client passes to
>> indicate a preference for or knowledge of a particular API microversion.
>>
>> The original spec said that the HTTP header should contain the name of
>> the service type returned by the Keystone service catalog (which is also
>> the official name of the REST API). I don't understand why the spec was
>> changed retroactively and why Nova has been changed to return
>> X-OpenStack-Nova-API-Version instead of X-OpenStack-Compute-API-Version
>> HTTP headers [4].
>>
>> To be blunt, Nova is the *implementation* of the OpenStack Compute API.
>> Ironic is the *implementation* of the OpenStack BareMetal API.
>>
>> The HTTP headers should never have been changed like this, IMHO, and I'm
>> disappointed that they were. In fact, it looks like a very select group
>> of individuals pushed through this change [5] with little to no input
>> from the mailing list or community.
>>
>> Since no support for these headers has yet to land in the client
>> packages, can we please reconsider this?
>
> I think you are seeing demons where there are none.

I don't think there are any demons anywhere :) Just a lack of 
communication and/or consensus.

 > I don't think it was
> ever really clear in the specification that official project short
> moniker was critical to the spec vs. code name that everyone uses. While
> I didn't weigh in on the review in question, I wouldn't have really seen
> an issue with it at the time.

OK.

> Honestly, we should work through standardization of the service catalog
> (as was discussed at Summit) first and before we push out a microversion
> on these projects to change this header, especially as that is the hook
> by which projects are versioning on now.

Sure, good point. Morgan, Adam, where are we on that?

-jay