Open Stack

Most of these issues (and a few more) are now tagged osapi-v1.1 (thanks
waldon).  If you do work on them please claim them first!

Thanks for the help.

Gabe

On 9/8/11 9:32 AM, "Gabe Westmaas" <gabe.westmaas at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:

>Hey Thierry,
>
>Here is a list the team compiled on the known gaps in the 1.1
>implementation.  I haven't had a chance to file any bugs on these yet, but
>wanted to at least answer this email with the list.  I split them roughly
>based on complexity.
>
>Most complex:
>resource uuids - there is a mixture of integer IDs and UUIDs in responses
>from the API right now
>versioned content types (Accept: application/xml; version=1.1) as a method
>for selecting the version
>Asynchronous faults (defined in 3.9.2)
>Pagination Links ("next" links, defined in 3.4 - this may not be that
>complex)
>
>Relatively simple:
>alternate links for images (links directly to glance, discussed in 3.3 and
>shown in examples 3.10 and 3.11)
>Collections sorted by create time (defined in 3.4)
>minDisk and minRam filtering of flavors output (defined in 4.4.1)
>minDisk and minRam exposed as attributes of images (defined in 4.5.1,
>requires work in glance)
>image statuses should match spec (defined in 4.5.1, requires work in
>glance)
>complex content types (e.g. Accept: application/vnd.openstack.compute+xml)
>
>
>This seems do-able, but of course help is appreciated.  If you are going
>to start on one, I think it makes sense to file a bug and claim it before
>starting to work on them.  The minDisk and minRam gaps, asynchronous
>faults and resource UUID gaps seem the most critical to me.
>
>Of course there may be other gaps as well - help identifying those is also
>very much appreciated.
>
>Gabe
>
>On 9/8/11 3:09 AM, "Thierry Carrez" <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
>
>>Ewan Mellor wrote:
>>> I would also add that if we claim that Diablo implements OpenStack API
>>>1.1, and there's a doc that calls itself OpenStack API 1.1, then if
>>>those two things don't match by the time we ship we don't deserve to
>>>call ourselves professionals and we should all go home.
>>> 
>>> I'm not going to get into arguments about designing the API up front vs
>>>driving the API from the capabilities of the platform.  I don't care why
>>>the two things are skewed at the moment.  However, they absolutely 100%
>>>have to be lined up by the time Diablo is released.
>>
>>A lot of people have been working on closing the gap this cycle, but
>>from where I stand, there still seems to be bugs regularly opened about
>>difference between API and code.
>>
>>Could someone that has been involved in keeping the gap under control
>>elaborate on the current status ? Are we looking good, bad ? Should we
>>tag all API gap bugs and try to focus our efforts on that ? Are the
>>remaining bugs considered "small enough" ?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>-- 
>>Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>>Release Manager, OpenStack
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>This email may include confidential information. If you received it in
>error, please delete it.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.