On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Clay Gerrard <clay.gerr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Matthew Thode <prometheanf...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > >> >> * Proper fix would be to make ceph support the account field >> > > Is the 'rgw_swift_account_in_url' option not correct/sufficient? > I guess we could just document that people need to use this. > * Workaround would be to specify an old swiftclient to install (3.1.0, >> pre-ocata) >> > > Doesn't seem great if a sysadmin wants to co-install the newer swiftclient > cli > > >> * Workaround would be to for swiftclient to be forked and 'fixed' >> >> > Not clear to me what the "fix" would be here - just don't do validation? > I'll assume the "fork threat" here is for completeness/emphasis :D > > Do you know if ironic works with "normal" swift tempurls or only the > radosgw implementation of the swift api? > It works with both, see the link from earlier in the thread: https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/214b694f05d200ac1e2ce6db631546f2831c01f7/ironic/common/glance_service/v2/image_service.py#L152-L185 // jim
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
