-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 08/05/2014 02:49 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>>> The second option would be to make a copy of the old
>>> ImageCacheManager in the Baremetal directory, and have the
>>> Baremetal driver use that.  This seems to me to be the better
>>> option, since it means that when the Baremetal driver is
>>> removed, the old ImageCacheManager code goes with it, without
>>> someone having to manually remove it.
>> 
>> I might get shot in the head, but I think option 2 makes the most
>> sense. There is no need to do _new_ work in support of a dead
>> codebase.
> 
> Agreed, making a copy isn't the end of the world, and we know
> we're going to delete it soonish anyway. We've asked the ironic
> folks to do a lot to make the baremetal transition easy and I see
> no reason to add a refactor dependency to the list so it can be
> deleted in six months :)

+1.  Just copy it.  More work seems like wasted effort.

- -- 
Russell Bryant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlPhMYwACgkQFg9ft4s9SAb2OgCcDiyXhV55P9++SBcM9iCouw8L
nroAnRkPDFPkLRlsqa/dEr5HUaBbIAeF
=1h0p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to