On 03/23/2015 02:06 PM, Dan Smith wrote: >> I am really sorry it got in as I have -1ed it several times for the same >> reason (I _really_ hate using the -2 hammer - we're all adults here >> after all). > > I guess that I should take some blame as a reviewer on that patch, but > only after this mail do I read some of your comments as fundamentally > opposed. The one that really articulates it wasn't a new vote so it > stood out even less. IMHO, -2 is precisely for "This shouldn't land as > it is" so would have been completely appropriate for this situation. > It's a meaningful signal and has nothing to do with the age of the > participants. > >> My reasoning for it is quite simple and is outlined in the revert patch >> commit message: >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/166767/ >> >> The reason for bringing this up on the email thread is that as a result >> we need to downgrade the RPC that has technically been released (k-3). >> >> Let me know what you think. > > I don't think we should revert it. Doing so will be quite messy. I think > we have a couple of options: > > 1. Leave it as-is. Especially since we are able to synthesize the old > call when necessary, it seems clear that we haven't lost any information > here. We deal with it, roll forward and fix it in L. > > 2. We add to the object, essentially deprecating the ratio fields that > you feel are problematic, and pass the data that you really want. That > way we have a small window of compatibility that we can drop after we > snap kilo. > > #1 requires no work now, but more work later; #2 requires quite a bit of > work now, which might be scary, but makes life easier in the long run. > > Given where we are, and since I don't really see this as a > sky-is-falling sort of thing, I think I'd err on the side of caution and > go with #1. A flat-out revert either requires us to ban an RPC version > (something we've never done, AFAIK) or just flat out roll back time and > pretend it never happened. >
Thanks for taking a look. Yes, agreed - it is probably better to focus on actual bugs that impact customers at this point. I will abandon the reverts, and work on proposing the fix-up for L. Cheers, Nikola __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
