Let's discuss this in community meeting.
I would suggest drop support for older version at least until we release
Murano 1.0. As soon as we start to guarantee backward compatibility we will
introduce MinimalMuranoVersion instead of Version because format would not
change but some particular template may require feature that was introduced
after specified version.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Timur Sufiev tsuf...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi all!
While adapting Murano's Dynamic UI to the new MuranoPL data input
format, I've encountered the need to add some new fields to it, which
meant that the 'Version' field also had to be added to Dynamic UI. So,
Dynamic UI definition without Version field is supposed to be of v.1
while upcoming Murano 0.5 release will support Dynamic UI v.2
processing (which produces data suitable for the MuranoPL in 0.5).
But then the next questions arised. What if Murano 0.5 Dynamic UI
processor gets definition in v.1 format? Should it be able to process
it as well? If it should, then to which murano-api endpoint should it
pass the resulting object model?
I suspect that we have to deal with a slightly broader scope: to which
extent should Murano components of each new version support the data
formats and APIs from the previous versions? I suggest to discuss this
question on the upcoming Murano's community meeting.
--
Timur Sufiev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Sincerely yours
Stanislav (Stan) Lagun
Senior Developer
Mirantis
35b/3, Vorontsovskaya St.
Moscow, Russia
Skype: stanlagun
www.mirantis.com
sla...@mirantis.com
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
