Open Stack

On 03/05/2016 12:27 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 03/04/2016 03:42 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/3/2016 9:14 PM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote:
>>> Hm, I found out the reason:
>>> https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/api/openstack/compute/servers.py#L1139-L1145 
>>>
>>>
>>> here we filtered out parameters like "deleted", and that's why the API
>>> behavior is like above mentioned.
>>>
>>> So should we simple add "deleted" to the tuple or a microversion is 
>>> needed?
>
>> Nice find. This is basically the same as the ip6 case which required
>> microversion 2.5 [1]. So I think this is going to require a 
>> microversion in
>> Newton to fix it (which means a blueprint and a spec since it's an 
>> API change).
>> But it's pretty trivial, the paperwork is the majority of the work.
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/179569/
>
> Does it really need a spec given that microversions are documented in 
> the codebase?
>
> That almost seems like paperwork for the sake of following the rules 
> rather than to serve any useful purpose.
>
> Is anyone really going to argue about the details?
>

I've been lurking on this discussion. I was worried that you were going 
to try to hard code "admin" somewhere in here.

If the only change is that the currently accepted set of params is 
enforced with the current set of policy rules, just in a slightly 
different place, it will not break people, and thus I would think no 
microversion is essential.  However, if the the user might need to test 
which way policy is enforced in order to use the right code path when 
doing a client call, then a microversion would be needed.



> Chris
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________ 
>
> 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