[openstack-dev] Deprecation warnings considered harmful?
ihrachys at redhat.com
Tue Mar 17 16:36:51 UTC 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 03/17/2015 05:22 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> On 03/13/2015 04:36 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 07:25 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: On
>> 03/13/2015 01:37 AM, Nikhil Manchanda wrote:
>>>>> Looking back at the meeting eavesdrop, the primary reasons
>>>>> why we deferred this work to Liberty was twofold:
>>>>> - It wasn't a set plan based on information available to
>>>>> us at the time. This being the case, we decided to wait
>>>>> until we had more information regarding the requirements
>>>>> around this from oslo.
>>>>> - We wanted to ensure that we had a corresponding hacking
>>>>> rule in place to prevent future patch-sets from using the
>>>>> deprecated module names.
>> For hacking check, I have a patch in review for 'hacking' repo
>> to add checks (both for stable branches where oslo.* namespace
>> is used, and new branches where oslo_* is expected):
>> - https://review.openstack.org/157894
>> Also, neutron has a (test covered) hacking check at:
>> Feel free to adopt.
>>> I wish we, as a community, were less obsessed with creating so
>>> many hacking rules. These are really minor changes and it's
>>> going to be a relatively short-lived issue that could just be
>>> fixed once. If there's a regression, fixing *that* won't be
>>> hard or take long.
> That relatively short-lived issue already resulted in multiple
> backports to stable branches with new namespaces being used. F.e.
> There is no safe way to communicate the issue to all parties
> involved, so if automation is good at catching those issues, it
> should be applied. It's wrong to rely on people when a hacking
> check is enough.
OK, that was a wrong example. Though we still had bugs before when a
patch that used oslo_* namespace was backported to Juno (which is wrong).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the OpenStack-dev