Open Stack

I've mocked up the change to implementation using the already landed
changes to ceph as an example

https://review.openstack.org/295571

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:44 PM Andrew Woodward <xarses at gmail.com> wrote:

> We had originally planned for the FFEs for both fuel-openstack-tasks[1]
> and fuel-remove-conflict-openstack to [2] to close on 3/20, This would have
> placed them before changes that conflict with
> fuel-refactor-osnailyfacter-for-puppet-master-compatibility [3].
>
> [1]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/088297.html
> [2]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/088298.html
> [3]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/089028.html
>
> However we found this morning that the changes from [2], and more of issue
> [1] will result in further issues such as [4], where as the task files
> move, any task that explicitly relied on it, now no longer is in the same
> path.
>
> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/295170/
>
> Due to this newly identified issue with backwards comparability. It
> appears that [4] shows that we have plugins using interfaces that we don't
> have formal coverage for so If we introduce this set of changes, we will
> cause breakage for plugins that use fuel's current tasks.
>
> From a deprecation standpoint we don't have a way to deal with this,
> unless  fuel-openstack-tasks [1] lands after
> fuel-refactor-osnailyfacter-for-puppet-master-compatibility [3]. In this
> case we can take advantage of the class include stubs, leaving a copy in
> the old location (osnailyfacter/modular/roles/compute.pp) pointing to the
> new include location (include openstack_tasks::roles::compute) and adding a
> warning for deprecation. The tasks includes in the new location
> openstack_tasks/examples/roles/compute.pp would simply include the updated
> class location w/o the warning.
>
> This would take care of [1] and it's review [5]
>
> [5] https://review.openstack.org/283332
>
> This still leaves [2] un-addressed, we still have 3 open CR for it:
>
> [6] Compute https://review.openstack.org/285567
> [7] Cinder https://review.openstack.org/294736
> [8] Swift https://review.openstack.org/294979
>
> Compute [6] is in good shape, while Cinder [7] and Swift [8] are not. For
> these do we want to continue to land them, if so what do we want to do
> about the now deprecated openstack:: tasks? We could leave them in place
> with a warning since we would not be using them
>
> --
>
> --
>
> Andrew Woodward
>
> Mirantis
>
> Fuel Community Ambassador
>
> Ceph Community
>
-- 

--

Andrew Woodward

Mirantis

Fuel Community Ambassador

Ceph Community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160321/9d84d43e/attachment.html>