Open Stack

On Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:36:40 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 11/19/2018 08:15 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>> On 11/18/2018 6:51 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
>>> Sounds make sense to me, and then we needn't fix this strange
>>> behaviour also https://review.openstack.org/#/c/409644/
>>
>> The same discussion was had in the spec for that change:
>>
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/511825/
>>
>> Ultimately it amounted to a big "meh, let's just not fix the bug but
>> also no one really cares about deprecating the API either".
> 
> So we'll let the apathy of the past dictate the actions of the future.

FWIW, my point of view on deprecating the API was/is, if people are 
using it to accomplish some task, why deprecate it if it's not hurting 
anything else? That is, I didn't want the aforementioned spec to amount 
to something like, someone proposes to fix a strange behavior they 
observed using the API and our answer is to deprecate the entire API.

If it's clear that no one is using or benefiting from the API, then I am 
in support of deprecating it. But I haven't felt certain about whether 
that's the case so far.

>> The only thing deprecating the API would do is signal that it probably
>> shouldn't be used. We would still support it on older microversions. If
>> all anyone cares about is signalling not to use the API then deprecation
>> is probably fine, but I personally don't feel too strongly about it
>> either way.
> 
> Deprecating these kinds of APIs would, as I mentioned in my original
> post, signal that the Nova team is actually serious about cleaning up
> the cruft and getting rid of the debt from years past.
> 
> And also that it is serious about Nova not being a dumping ground for
> orchestration and out-of-scope APIs not related to a Compute API.

That's fair enough, and if we can get a quick confirmation from 
operators we know (CERN, NeCTAR, Oath, Vexxhost, OVH, etc) that they 
don't use the API, I agree we should go ahead and deprecate it for the 
reasons you mention.

-melanie