> On 4 Oct 2016, at 17:36, Chris Dent <cdent...@anticdent.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016, Julien Danjou wrote: > >> Considering the split of Ceilometer in subprojects (Aodh and Panko) >> during those last cycles, and the increasing usage of Gnocchi, I am >> starting to wonder if it makes sense to maintain the legacy Ceilometer >> API. > > No surprise, as I've been saying this for a long time, but yeah, I think > the API and storage should be deprecated. I think at some of the mid- > cycles and summits we've had discussions about the parts of ceilometer > that should be preserved, including any pollsters for which a > notification does not or cannot exist. > > The data gathering (and to some extent transforming) parts are the only > parts of ceilometer that are particularly unique so it would be good > for those to be preserved. > >
What would be the impact for Heat users who are using the Ceilometer scaling in their templates? Tim > -- > Chris Dent ┬─┬ノ( º _ ºノ) https://anticdent.org/ > freenode: cdent tw: > @anticdent__________________________________________________________________________ > 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
