On 9/19/14, 9:01 AM, "Jeremy Stanley" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 2014-09-18 14:35:10 +0000 (+0000), Ian Cordasco wrote: >> Except that even OpenStack doesn’t pin requests because of how >> extraordinarily stable our API is. >[...] > >FWIW, I nearly capped it a few weeks ago with >https://review.openstack.org/117848 but since the affected projects >were able to rush in changes to their use of the library to work >around the ways it was breaking I ended up abandoning that. Also for >some months we capped requests in our global requirements because of >https://launchpad.net/bugs/1182271 but that was finally lifted about >a year ago with https://review.openstack.org/37461 (so I don't think >it's entirely fair to assert that "OpenStack doesn’t pin requests >because...extraordinarily stable"). >-- >Jeremy Stanley A) Not the thread for this discussion. B) I didn’t say that OpenStack *never* pinned it, I said it didn’t currently C) Did you read the whole thread? I mentioned 2.4.0 as an exception because of ProtocolErrors and the redirect_cache members of OpenStack lobbied for. D) Before someone else replies, I assumed the transition from 0.x -> 1.0 was also the other obvious (and not worth mentioning) break in stability given that since then we’ve had no API changes (with the exception of 2.4.0 not re-wrapping a single urllib3 exception). _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
