Open Stack

Yes, to do it differently we need to add the microversion support patch
that you are working on, and make use of it, or write a patch that has
equivalent functionality.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Rob Cresswell <robert.cresswell at outlook.com
> wrote:

> Just a thought: With the way we currently do microversions, wouldnt this
> request 2.40 for every request ? There's a pretty good chance that would
> break things.
>
> Rob
>
> On 20 January 2017 at 00:02, Richard Jones <r1chardj0n3s at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> FFE granted for the three patches. We need to support that nova API
>> change.
>>
>> On 20 January 2017 at 01:28, Radomir Dopieralski <openstack at sheep.art.pl>
>> wrote:
>> > I would like to request a feature freeze exception for the following
>> patch:
>> >
>> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410337
>> >
>> > This patch adds support for retrieving the simple tenant usages from
>> Nova in
>> > chunks, and it is necessary for correct data given that related patches
>> have
>> > been already merged in Nova. Without
>> > it, the data received will be truncated.
>> >
>> > In order to actually use that patch, however, it is necessary to set the
>> > Nova API version to at least
>> > version 3.40. For this, it's necessary to also add this patch:
>> >
>> > https://review.openstack.org/422642
>> >
>> > However, that patch will not work, because of a bug in the
>> VersionManager,
>> > which for some reason
>> > uses floating point numbers for specifying versions, and thus
>> understands
>> > 2.40 as 2.4. To fix that, it
>> > is also necessary to merge this patch:
>> >
>> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410688
>> >
>> > I would like to request an exception for all those three patches.
>> >
>> > An alternative to this would be to finish and merge the microversion
>> > support, and modify the first patch to make use of it. Then we would
>> need
>> > exceptions for those two patches.
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.op
>> enstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> >
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib
>> e
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170123/cff909ef/attachment.html>