> On Mar 14, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Ian Cordasco <sigmaviru...@gmail.com> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: March 14, 2016 at 09:41:02 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Maintaining httplib2 python library > >> On 03/14/2016 10:24 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Davanum Srinivas >>> Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Date: March 14, 2016 at 09:18:50 >>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Maintaining httplib2 python library >>> >>>> Team, >>>> >>>> fyi, http://bitworking.org/news/2016/03/an_update_on_httplib2 >>>> >>>> We have httplib2 in our global requirements and lots of projects are >>>> using it[1]. Is there anyone willing to step up? >>> >>> Is it really worth our time to dedicate extra resources to that? Glance has >>> been discussing >> (but it's been a low priority) to switing all our dependence on httplib2 to >> requests (and >> maybe urllib3 directly) as necessary. >>> >>> We have other tools and libraries we can use without taking over >>> maintenance of yet another >> library. >>> >>> I think the better question than "Can people please maintain this for the >>> community?" >> is "What benefits does httplib2 have over something that is actively >> maintained (and >> has been actively maintaiend) like urllib3, requests, etc.?" >>> >>> And then we can (and should) also ask "Why have we been using this? How >>> much work do cores >> think it would be to remove this from our global requirements?" >> >> +1. >> >> Here is the non comprehensive list of usages based on what trees I >> happen to have checked out (which is quite a few, but not all of >> OpenStack for sure). >> >> I think before deciding to take over ownership of an upstream lib (which >> is a large commitment over space and time), we should figure out the >> migration cost. All the uses in Tempest come from usage in Glance IIRC >> (and dealing with chunked encoding). >> >> Neutron seems to use it for a couple of proxies, but that seems like >> requests/urllib3 might be sufficient. > > The Neutron team should talk to Cory Benfield (CC'd) and myself more about > this if they run into problems. requests and urllib3 are a little limited > with respect to proxies due to limitations in httplib itself. > > Both of us might be able to dedicate time during the day to fix this if > Neutron/OpenStack have specific requirements that requests is not currently > capable of supporting.
Looks like neutron is using it to do HTTP requests via unix domain sockets. Unless I’m missing something, requests doesn’t support that directly. There are a couple of other libs that do, or we could monkey patch the socket. Or modify the agents to use localhost. doug > >> I suspect Glance is really the lynchpin here (as it actually does some >> low level stuff with it). If there can be a Glance plan to get off of >> it, the rest can follow pretty easily. > > I'm in a meeting right now, but I think I will be able to lead a spike to get > Glance off of this if the rest of the Glance team is okay with it. > > -- > Ian Cordasco > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
