Mark Washenberger wrote: > > FWIW, I don't think the changes glanceclient needs in v1 will > break the > > 'B' case above. But it does raise a question--if they did, would it be > > sufficient to backport a change to adapt old supported stable B > versions > > of, say, Nova, to work with the v1 client? Honestly asking, a big > ol' NO > > is okay. > > I'm not sure I follow all the pronouns. Could you re-state this again, I > think I know what you're asking, but I'd like to be sure. > > > Sorry for being so vague. I'll try to be specific. > > Branch nova/stable/folsom depends on python-glanceclient/master. Suppose > we find that nova/stable/folsom testing is broken when we stage > (hopefully before merging) the breaking changes that are part of the > python-glanceclient v1.0.0 release. Would it be acceptable in this case > to have a compatibility patch to nova/stable/folsom? Or will the only > option be to modify the python-glanceclient patch to maintain compatibility?
I think that would be an acceptable backport, with bonus points if you can make sure it doesn't break old versions of the libs that could still be used with stable/folsom. (That's a theoretical example though, since we don't have a stable/folsom maintained branch anymore). -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
