Open Stack

I also agree that it is good idea and I would be very happy to help with such migration :)

— 
Best regards
Slawek Kaplonski
slawek at kaplonski.pl

> Wiadomość napisana przez Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> w dniu 26.02.2018, o godz. 11:14:
> 
> On 02/26/2018 09:57 AM, Akihiro Motoki wrote:
>> Hi neutron and openstacksdk team,
>> This mail proposes to change the first priority of neutron-related
>> python binding to OpenStack SDK rather than neutronclient python
>> bindings.
>> I think it is time to start this as OpenStack SDK became a official
>> project in Queens.
> 
> ++
> 
>> [Current situations and problems]
>> Network OSC commands are categorized into two parts: OSC and
>> neutronclient OSC plugin.
>> Commands implemented in OSC consumes OpenStack SDK
>> and commands implemented as neutronclient OSC plugin consumes
>> neutronclient python bindings.
>> This brings tricky situation that some features are supported only in
>> OpenStack SDK and some features are supported only in neutronclient
>> python bindings.
>> [Proposal]
>> The proposal is to implement all neutron features in OpenStack SDK as
>> the first citizen,
>> and the neutronclient OSC plugin consumes corresponding OpenStack SDK APIs.
>> Once this is achieved, users of OpenStack SDK users can see all
>> network related features.
>> [Migration plan]
>> The migration starts from Rocky (if we agree).
>> New features should be supported in OpenStack SDK and
>> OSC/neutronclient OSC plugin as the first priority. If new feature
>> depends on neutronclient python bindings, it can be implemented in
>> neutornclient python bindings first and they are ported as part of
>> existing feature transition.
>> Existing features only supported in neutronclient python bindings are
>> ported into OpenStack SDK,
>> and neutronclient OSC plugin will consume them once they are
>> implemented in OpenStack SDK.
> 
> I think this is a great idea. We've got a bunch of good functional/integrations tests in the sdk gate as well that we can start running on neutron patches so that we don't lose cross-gating.
> 
>> [FAQ]
>> 1. Will neutornclient python bindings be removed in future?
>> Different from "neutron" CLI, as of now, there is no plan to drop the
>> neutronclient python bindings.
>> Not a small number of projects consumes it, so it will be maintained as-is.
>> The only change is that new features are implemented in OpenStack SDK first and
>> enhancements of neutronclient python bindings will be minimum.
>> 2. Should projects that consume neutronclient python bindings switch
>> to OpenStack SDK?
>> Necessarily not. It depends on individual projects.
>> Projects like nova that consumes small set of neutron features can
>> continue to use neutronclient python bindings.
>> Projects like horizon or heat that would like to support a wide range
>> of features might be better to switch to OpenStack SDK.
> 
> We've got a PTG session with Heat to discuss potential wider-use of SDK (and have been meaning to reach our to horizon as well) Perhaps a good first step would be to migrate the heat.engine.clients.os.neutron:NeutronClientPlugin code in Heat from neutronclient to SDK. There's already an heat.engine.clients.os.openstacksdk:OpenStackSDKPlugin plugin in Heat. I started a patch to migrate senlin from senlinclient (which is just a thin wrapper around sdk): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/532680/
> 
> For those of you who are at the PTG, I'll be giving an update on SDK after lunch on Wednesday. I'd also be more than happy to come chat about this more in the neutron room if that's useful to anybody.
> 
> Monty
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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