On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Christopher Yeoh <cbky...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com > > wrote: > >> I've seen a few bugs/reviews like this [1] lately which are essentially >> backporting fixes from the nova openstack v3 API to the v2 API. While this >> is goodness for the v2 API, I'm not sure why we're spending time on low >> priority bug fixes like this for the v2 API when v3 is the future. >> Shouldn't only high impact / high probability fixes get backported to the >> nova v2 API now? I think most people are still using v2 so they are >> probably happy to get the fixes, but it kind of seems to prolong the >> inevitable. >> >> Am I missing something? >> >> > The V2 API is going to be with us for quite a while even if the as planned > V3 API becomes official with > the icehouse release. At the moment the V2 API is still even open for new > features - this will probably > change at the end of I-2. > > I agree those bugs are quite low priority fixes and the V3 work is a lot > more important, but I don't think we should blocking > them yet. We should perhaps reconsider the acceptance of very low priority > fixes like you reference towards or at the end of > Icehouse. > I don't think we should be blocking them per-se as long as they fit the API change guidelines https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/APIChangeGuidelines. > > Chris > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
