On 11/17/2015 05:31 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 11/17/2015 2:05 PM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: >> >> >> Le 17/11/2015 20:25, Sean Dague a écrit : >>> On 11/17/2015 01:48 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/17/2015 11:28 AM, Alexis Lee wrote: >>>>> Often in Nova we introduce an option defaulted off (so as not to break >>>>> people) but then we want to make it default in the next release. >>>>> >>>>> Someone suggested an opt flag to mark this but I don't know what >>>>> impact >>>>> they wanted it to have. IE how the user should be alerted about the >>>>> presence of these flagged options. >>>>> >>>>> If you are that person, or have opinions on this, please reply :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Alexis (lxsli) >>>>> >>>> There is the deprecated_for_removal kwarg, but that doesn't fit here. >>>> There is the DeprecatedOpt, but that's for moving/renaming options. So >>>> this is something else, like deprecated_default or >>>> pending_default_change or something. >>> Honestly, with reno now we could probably just add a release note in >>> when we add it. That's more likely for us to not loose a thing like >>> that. >>> >>> -Sean >>> >> >> Agreed, it's now far easier to ask for having a release note within the >> change, so the operators can just look at that. It also seems to me far >> better for them to check the release notes rather than trying to see the >> huge nova.conf file... >> >> -Sylvain >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > Sure, a release note is justified, just like when we deprecate or rename > an option. > > The thing I like about the deprecated_for_removal kwarg is the warning > that gets logged when you are still using the thing. I'm sure people see > release notes for deprecated things and say, I'll add a TODO to clean > this up in our tooling, but then get busy and forget about it until they > break. The annoying warning is a constant indicator that this is > something you need to move off of sooner rather than later.
Yes, I like also using the deprecated_for_removal flags, and I don't
want to change that.
This is just for the case of "we're going to change the default on the
next release". I think in that case, a release note is the right thing.
We don't need new fancy code for that.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
