hpcloud-objectstorage has its own signer, although hpcloud-compute uses the standard signer.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote: > AFAIK the hp provider only added the endpoints but no custom apis/config, > so unless they change the private service significantly the generic > openstack-api shoulg be goot to go. > El 25/10/2015 18:03, "Andrew Gaul" <g...@apache.org> escribió: > > > Filed JCLOUDS-1026. Note that HP plans to continue offering a private > > cloud solution although obviously this is harder for us to test or even > > understand without access to the service. Hopefully someone at HP will > > step up here. > > > > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote: > > > +1. Let's alsofile a jira issue to schedule the removal of the > > > hpcloud-compute provider. > > > El 25/10/2015 5:10, "Andrew Gaul" <g...@apache.org> escribió: > > > > > > > HP announced that it will sunset its public cloud offering on 31 Jan > > > > 2016: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://h30499.www3.hp.com/t5/Grounded-in-the-Cloud/A-new-model-to-deliver-public-cloud/ba-p/6804409 > > > > > > > > I would like to remove support for hpcloud-objectstorage in master, > > > > which uses the legacy swift provider. The modern openstack-swift > > > > provider obsoletes the older provider and we have struggled to find > > > > someone to rebase HP support onto the newer provider. Having two > > > > providers also confuses users with some accidentally using the buggy > > and > > > > incomplete legacy provider instead of the modern provider. While HP > > > > will end service in a few months, I believe we should remove support in > > > > master now and users can continue to use 1.9.1 to access HP. Any > > > > objections? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Andrew Gaul > > > > http://gaul.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > > Andrew Gaul > > http://gaul.org/ > > -- Andrew Gaul http://gaul.org/
