-----Original Message----- From: Matthew Thode <prometheanf...@gentoo.org> Reply: prometheanf...@gentoo.org <prometheanf...@gentoo.org>, OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Date: September 7, 2016 at 08:12:15 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1
> https://review.openstack.org/366631 > > The combination of oslo.context 2.9.0 + positional 1.0.1 (which is the > current minimum requirement) results in various unit test failures in > barbican, related to parsing of request headers in generated contexts > for unit testing. Updating to 1.1.1 resolves this issue. So I take it someone has verified that the request headers used in the faked(?) contexts in these tests will never be seen in the real world then? I looked at the tests that James linked in the barbican channel when they were looking for help debugging this and those looked like *functional* tests, not unit tests. That doesn't give me any confidence that this is *just* a testing issue. > This is specifically affecting barbican and RDO testing (from discussion > and the review). I believe this is also affecting Ubuntu's backing of Newton-3, but James can correct me if I'm wrong. > The reason I think an FFE is needed is because downstream packagers, > while encouraged to package based on upper-constraints sometimes don't. > Meaning they'd miss something like this. > > Arguments against are that this will have knock on effects down the line > (will require re-releases and re-re-releases because of updating things > like keystone (this is deep in the depgraph)), so is bad from a release > team work point of view. Also, I think this just effects testing, so > the impact of this is more minor than something more serious (not JUST > breaking testing). That's one aspect of the conversation. The other is that we *claim* to support a minimum version of positional which we don't actually support (and it seems like we either can't or won't). We should have the *correct* minimum version specified. While I think this is the *correct* approach, I also realize that the release team is probably against this for more *pragmatic* reasons and I respect those and the release team immensely. I'd like them to weigh in here as well. -- Ian Cordasco __________________________________________________________________________ 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
