On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Yaniv Kaul <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Moran Goldboim <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Sandro Bonazzola <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Moran Goldboim <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> my pov - really depends on when do we release 4.1. >>>> short version (Dec 16) - we should keep it, and 3.6 api as well >>>> long version (Mar 17) - let's drop it than. >>>> >>>> bottom line - we would like to give customers/community the time to >>>> migrate their el6 base deployment to el7 , while allowing them dual >>>> management infra. by march next year we should be in the 7.4/.next >>>> timeframe - this should be ok to our conservative customer base as well >>>> >>> >>> el6 to el7 host migration should have been done in 3.5. 3.6 doesn't >>> support el6 as hosts... >>> >>> >> busted here - you are right.. :) >> the main point is to allow this deprecation to happen form our >> integration projects and users side. if we will release early - i would >> suggest to keep the support for additional version. >> > > Keep support for what exactly? What can use the XML-RPC but our own > internal tools (such as MOM) which we'll convert? > Y. > > I was referring to 3.6 engine (part of 3.x engines..)- api. i don't think we should support 3.5 or xml-rpc. > >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Yaniv Dary <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What is the cost of keeping them? >>>>> >>>>> Yaniv Dary >>>>> Technical Product Manager >>>>> Red Hat Israel Ltd. >>>>> 34 Jerusalem Road >>>>> Building A, 4th floor >>>>> Ra'anana, Israel 4350109 >>>>> >>>>> Tel : +972 (9) 7692306 >>>>> 8272306 >>>>> Email: [email protected] >>>>> IRC : ydary >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 02:13:40PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: >>>>>> > Hi all, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > We should not support now Engine 3.5 with ovirt 4.0, but vdsm still >>>>>> > accept 3.5 engines - I guess we forgot to disable it in 4.0. >>>>>> >>>>>> Correct. There was a moment in time where we considered supporting 3.5 >>>>>> as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > In 4.1, I don't think we should support any 3.x Engine - otherwise >>>>>> we >>>>>> > will have to waste time maintaining old apis and infrastructure, >>>>>> instead >>>>>> > of adding new features that matter to our users. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you have a list of old APIs you'd like to throw away? We've killed >>>>>> a >>>>>> few in 4.0, and >>>>>> $ git grep REQUIRED_FOR >>>>>> is not huge. >>>>>> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I suggest we disable now support for 3.x engines. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Please see Eli patch: >>>>>> > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/59308 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> +1, but let's see if ydary/mgoldboi think we should keep 3.6. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Devel mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sandro Bonazzola >>> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. >>> See how it works at redhat.com >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> > >
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
