On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Dan Smith <d...@danplanet.com> 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 :)


OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to