Just check we have removed deprecated methods in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/241179/ for Nova. So current there is no work from Nova side now.
2015-12-22 13:53 GMT+08:00 ChangBo Guo <[email protected]>: > > > 2015-12-22 3:42 GMT+08:00 Matt Riedemann <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> On 12/21/2015 1:22 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> >>> Rob, >>> >>> Can we set some goals for the server projects too? >>> >>> Say anything deprecated in liberty timeframe in oslo libs or any other >>> libs we consume should be fixed by milestone2 in mitaka? At the moment >>> the burden is entirely on oslo and hence unfair. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Dims >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Robert Collins >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 21 December 2015 at 04:57, Davanum Srinivas <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Nova folks, >>>>> >>>>> We have this review in oslo.utils: >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/252898/ >>>>> >>>>> There were failed effort in the past to cleanup in Nova: >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164753/ >>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/197601/ >>>>> >>>>> What do we do? Suggestions please. >>>>> >>>> >>>> We don't remove it yet. Not till liberty-eol at the earliest, or if we >>>> don't get users migrated early enough, mitaka-eol. >>>> >>>> We would benefit from an automated thing in place to tell projects >>>> like Nova that they are using deprecated things during CI (without >>>> bloating deployer logs) - whether a keystone API, an oslo config >>>> option or function, or $whatever. We would also benefit from a thing >>>> to rollup such information from consuming projects back to the >>>> deprecating project, so we can tell whether we're ready to cleanup old >>>> things. >>>> >>>> I think in general that there needs to be a balance around effort on >>>> migrations: if oslo deprecates something - anything - we're creating >>>> work for consumers of oslo. Its unfair for us to do that unilaterally. >>>> Conversely, if projects don't migrate away from poor APIs onto newer >>>> better ones, they create long term maintenance work for oslo: so we >>>> all need to work together to coordinate such things. >>>> >>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/226157/12 is part of this - it is an >>>> effort to bring consistency in expectations and process/patterns here. >>>> >>>> -Rob >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Robert Collins <[email protected]> >>>> Distinguished Technologist >>>> HP Converged Cloud >>>> >>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> Unsubscribe: >>>> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Nova also needs an Oslo liaison [1]. That used to be Joe Gordon, but he's >> gone now. That would really be the person in Nova driving the Oslo changes >> and review priorities. >> >> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Oslo >> >> -- >> > > Matt, I would like to take the liaison for Nova, I worked on both Nova > and Oslo, as Oslo core reviewer I attend Oslo weekly meeting and will > help Nova and Oslo team work together smoothly. I would like to submit > new commit to removing deprecated method for Nova. > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Matt Riedemann >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > > > -- > ChangBo Guo(gcb) > -- ChangBo Guo(gcb)
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
