Open Stack

Hi all,

Sorry about the lack of reply, it was a extended long weekend over here.

Thanks to the heat team for jumping on this and resolving it so quickly.

Regards,
Jake

On 23/9/2022 5:29 pm, Tony Breeds wrote:
> Hi all,
>      Thanks to the heat team they quickly resolved the problem and the 
> release and requirements teams can/have moved forward.
> 
> #thanks
> 
> On Wed, 21 Sept 2022 at 15:57, Tony Breeds <tony at bakeyournoodle.com 
> <mailto:tony at bakeyournoodle.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Okay cool.  I'll take a punt at removing it
> 
>     On Wed, 21 Sept 2022 at 15:50, Brendan Shephard <bshephar at redhat.com
>     <mailto:bshephar at redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
>         Hey Tony,
> 
>         Thanks for the heads up. We have deprecated support for these
>         resources some time ago:
>         https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/heat/+/433549
>         <https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/heat/+/433549>
> 
>         I don't believe there are any concerns with removing this
>         resource and subsequent use of the baymodel API from Heat now.
> 
>         Brendan Shephard
> 
>         Senior Software Engineer
> 
>         Red Hat APAC <https://www.redhat.com>
> 
>         193 N Quay
> 
>         Brisbane City QLD 4000
> 
>         @RedHat <https://twitter.com/redhat> Red Hat
>         <https://www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat> Red Hat
>         <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
>         <https://red.ht/sig> 	
>         <https://redhat.com/summit>
> 
> 
> 
>         On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 3:37 PM Tony Breeds
>         <tony at bakeyournoodle.com <mailto:tony at bakeyournoodle.com>> wrote:
> 
>             Hello all,
>                  In [1] baymodel code was removed, although it still
>             seems to be
>             listed in the API-ref. Story [2] states it's been deprecated
>             for a
>             long time, but a quick check failed to see this documented
>             anywhere.
>             Heat still supports baymodel and the removal is causing
>             failures.
>             Blocking the use of python-magnumclient 4.0.0[3] inzed, even
>             though
>             the 4.0.0 release is clearly meant for zed.
> 
>             I can see a couple of paths forward.
> 
>             0. Remove the documentation in the api-ref for baymodels
>             1. Remove the support in heat for baymodels  (I think the newer
>             clusters API can be used instead?)
>             2. Revert the change in magnumclient and re-release etc etc
>             3. Keep 4.0.0 for the Antelope release, and reset the stable/zed
>             branch python-magnumclient to fd0cb1e (before the removal of
>             baymodels)
> 
>             Obviously option 1 looks like the least disruptive change, but
>             potentially causes a problem for heat depending on the
>             published state
>             of baymodel support
> 
>             [1]
>             https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-magnumclient/+/803629 <https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-magnumclient/+/803629>
>             [2] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2009104
>             <https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2009104>
>             [3]
>             https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/858089
>             <https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/requirements/+/858089>
> 
>             -- 
>             Yours Tony.
> 
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     Yours Tony.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Yours Tony.