Open Stack

On 10/01/15 at 06:17am, Sean Dague wrote:
>On 09/30/2015 10:41 PM, melanie witt wrote:
>> On Sep 30, 2015, at 14:45, Andrew Laski <andrew at lascii.com
>> <mailto:andrew at lascii.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a slight preference for #1.  Nova is not buggy here novaclient
>>> is so I think we should contain the fix there.
>>>
>>> Is using the v2 API an option?  That should also allow the 3 extra
>>> parameters mentioned in #2.
>
>It could be, but it would invalidate the claim that operators can just
>point people at v2.1 and it won't be noticed.

I thought we were always clear that it shouldn't be noticed, unless the 
client in use was doing something it shouldn't be.  The goal of strict 
validation was to make that known to users.  Bugs in Tempest were 
discovered this way and bugs in novaclient and the previous response has 
always been to fix client behavior.

>
>>
>> +1. I have put up https://review.openstack.org/229669 in -W mode in case
>> we decide to go that route.
>>
>> -melanie
>
>As the concensus is for item #1, I'm fine with that. +2 on
>https://review.openstack.org/229669.
>
>Let's get that landed and cut a new release today.
>
>	-Sean
>
>-- 
>Sean Dague
>http://dague.net
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev