Open Stack

Hi,
At the moment private methods are used all over the place. Examples for this are the address pairs and the security groups. If you do a grep of the ML2 plugin you will see these innocent private methods being used.
The end goal would be for us to have these as public methods.
Thanks
Gary




On 1/12/16, 11:52 AM, "Smigiel, Dariusz" <dariusz.smigiel at intel.com> wrote:

>
>
>> Doug Wiegley <dougwig at parksidesoftware.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Jan 11, 2016, at 2:42 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Sean M. Collins <sean at coreitpro.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 07:50:47AM PST, Chris Dent wrote:
>> >>>>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Gary Kotton wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The commit
>> >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openstack_neutron_commit_5d53dfb8d64186-2D&d=BQICAg&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=VlZxHpZBmzzkWT5jqz9JYBk8YTeq9N3-diTlNj4GyNc&m=JeGcqDfJO3uBpHFJtMpFdfKGvUvygEhoI7bztB14S9w&s=6QRgfZxiJsf6Mgon-2G_2DUSuUWXKQED2HH38t_TGz8&e= 
>> >>>>> b5b1d2f356fbff8f222e15d1b2 may break the decomposed plugins that
>> >>>>> make use of the method _get_tenant_id_for_create
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Just out of curiosity, is it not standard practice that a plugin
>> >>>> shouldn't use a private method?
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 - hopefully decomposed plugins will audit their code and look for
>> >>> other calls to private methods.
>> >>
>> >> The fact that it broke *aas repos too suggests that we were not
>> >> showing a proper example to those decomposed. I think it can be
>> >> reasonable to restore the method until N, with a deprecation message,
>> >> as Garry suggested in his patch. Especially since there is no actual
>> >> burden to keep the method for another cycle.
>> >
>> > The neutron community has been really lax about enforcing private
>> methods.
>> > And while we should absolutely reverse that trend, likely we should
>> > give some warning. I agree with not going whole hog on that until N.
>> >
>> > I'd suggest putting in a debtcollector reference when putting the method
>> back.
>> 
>> Done. https://review.openstack.org/265315
>
>
>Do we have any consensus about treating private methods? Any general tips about it, or every time should it be left for author decision?
>
>Should we use deprecation warning for all refactored private methods, treating it as "API" and rewriting underneath code?
>
>Thanks, Dariusz (dasm) Smigiel
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>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