Hi Doug,
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:01:54 -0600
Doug Wiegley doug...@parksidesoftware.com wrote:
Hi Gary,
First I’m seeing these, but I don’t see that they’re required on
input, unless I’m mis-reading those reviews. Additional of new
output fields to a json object, or adding optional inputs,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 09:52:14PM +1030, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 16:14:21 -0400
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/09/2015 03:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 03/08/2015 08:10 AM, Alex Xu wrote
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:22:12 -0400
Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:08 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
While its not under Nova's control, I think we need to consider the
keystone catalog here.
It feels nice to have an explicit entry for v2.1, that people start
using
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:15:50 -0400
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
Our current top level shipped example paste.ini for Nova includes the
following set of endpoint definitions:
[composite:osapi_compute]
use = call:nova.api.openstack.urlmap:urlmap_factory
/: oscomputeversions
/v1.1:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:56:27 +1300
Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 17 March 2015 at 14:27, Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am worried about SDKs making requests that have additional JSON
attributes that were previously ignored by v2, but will be
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 09:51:27 -0700
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/26/2015 04:27 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
In trying to move the flavor manage negative tests out of Tempest
and into the Nova functional tree, I ran into one set of tests
which are permissions checking. Basically that a
So ultimately I think this is a style issue rather than a technical one. I
think there
are situations where one way looks clearer than another the other way does.
Sorry I can't get around to putting up a couple of examples,
ATM but to be clear there is no difference in the end result (no different
of
the V2 API code asap anyway. You can after all request a version number of
a per method basis as long as you are talking to v2.1. So the only forced
upgrade is the v2-v2.1 transition and those apis should be identical
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com
wrote
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:32:11 -0600
Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm working on bug #1420848 which addresses the issue that doing a
service-disable followed by a service-enable against
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 16:14:21 -0400
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/09/2015 03:37 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 03/08/2015 08:10 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
Thanks for Jay point this out! If we have agreement on this and
document it, that will be great for guiding developer how to add
new API.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:08 PM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
Hi,
I think I agree with Jay here, but let me explain...
On 8 March 2015 at 12:10, Alex Xu sou...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for Jay point this out! If we have agreement on this and document
it,
that will be great
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:08 PM, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote:
+1
Please could you submit a dev ref for this?
We can argue on the review, a bit like this one:
https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/doc/source/devref/policy_enforcement.rst
I think it'd also be a good
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/07/2015 07:31 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Stackers,
Now that microversions have been introduced to the Nova API (meaning we
can now have novaclient request, say, version 2.3 of the Nova API using
the special
Hi,
Apologies for the slow reply, long weekend because of a public holiday over
here. I'm probably going to end up repeating part of what
Alex has mentioned as well.
So the first thing I think we want to distinguish between plugins being a
REST API user or operator concept and it being
a tool
, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:28:34 -0500
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:24 AM, Claudiu Belu wrote:
Hello.
I've talked with Christopher Yeoh yesterday and I've asked him
about the microversions and when will they be able to merge. He
said that for now
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:28:34 -0500
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:24 AM, Claudiu Belu wrote:
Hello.
I've talked with Christopher Yeoh yesterday and I've asked him
about the microversions and when will they be able to merge. He
said that for now, this commit had
Hi,
The Nova API subgroup is planning on releasing V2.1 on Monday (changing its
status from experimental to CURRENT) and merging the first patch which uses
microversions on top of 2.1 on the Wednesday.
In the meantime we'd appreciate it if reviewers did not +A any patchset
which changes the REST
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
On 2/16/2015 9:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Hi Mikal, sorry for top-posting. What was the final decision regarding
the instance tagging work?
Thanks,
-jay
On 02/16/2015 09:44 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
Erdfelt
gave his +1, currently the commit has a +2.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/150800/
[2] Nova-API change: It uses the microversioning API and it has been
decided to be the first microversioning commit, since it is closest to
merge. Christopher Yeoh reviewed helped with this commit
Wow, this is great! Thank you!
Chris
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 8:56 AM, James E. Blair cor...@inaugust.com wrote:
Hi,
We have added support for cross-repo dependencies (CRD) in Zuul. The
important bits:
* To use them, include Depends-On: gerrit-change-id in the footer of
your commit
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
I'm not going to hide it, I don't know what's going on with the v2.1 API
status, i.e. what is the criteria to that thing dropping it's
'experimental' label?
So I caught up with Matt on IRC, repeating some
or 'latest')
Regards,
Chris
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Andrey Kurilin akuri...@mirantis.com
wrote:
Thanks for the summary, I'll try to send first patch(maybe WIP) in few
days.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 4:09
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/29/2015 12:41 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
Correct. This actually came up at the Nova mid cycle in a side
conversation with Ironic and Neutron folks.
HTTP error codes are not sufficiently granular to describe what happens
,
Chris
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:51:54 +0200
Andrey Kurilin akuri...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
After removing nova V3 API from novaclient[1], implementation of v1.1
client is used for v1.1, v2 and v3 [2
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 01/31/2015 05:24 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
Hi
This discussion came up at the cinder mid-cycle last week too,
specifically in the context of 'Can we change the details text in an
existing error, or is that an
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:53:55 +
Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Hi Folks,
Is there any support yet in novaclient for requesting a specific
microversion ? (looking at the final leg of extending
clean-shutdown to the API, and wondering how to test this in devstack
via the novaclient)
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:51:54 +0200
Andrey Kurilin akuri...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
After removing nova V3 API from novaclient[1], implementation of v1.1
client is used for v1.1, v2 and v3 [2].
Since we moving to micro versions, I wonder, do we need such
mechanism of choosing api
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 07:31:19 -0500
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/06/2015 06:25 AM, Chen CH Ji wrote:
Based on nova-specs api-microversions.rst
we support following function definition format, but it violate the
hacking rule pep8 F811 because duplicate function definition
we
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:10:41 -0500
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
Thoughts on getting consistency across all 3 projects (and possibly
others)?
Yeah, I personally like the second option as well, but agree that
consistency is the key (pun intended) here.
I would say let's make a
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote:
Greetings,
I would like to nominate Melanie Witt for the python-novaclient-core team.
(What is python-novaclient-core? Its a new group which will contain
all of nova-core as well as anyone else we think should have core
Hi,
Given the timing (no spec approved) it sounds like a v2.1 plus
microversions (just merging) with no v2 changes at all.
The v2.1 framework is more flexible and you should need no changes to
servers.py at all as there are hooks for adding extra parameters in
separate plugins. There are
So I think this is something we really should get agreement on across the
open stack API first before flipping back and forth on a case by case
basis.
Personally I think we should be using uuids for uniqueness and leave any
extra restrictions to a ui layer if really required. If we try to have
If force delete doesn't work please do submit the bug report along with as
much of the relevant nova logs as you can. Even better if it's easily
repeatable with devstack.
Chris
On Sat, 13 Dec 2014 at 8:43 am, pcrews glee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/09/2014 03:54 PM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
Hi,
with the V3 API. But I
will defer to Christopher Yeoh/Ken’ichi Ohmichi for the details.
I think it can all just be removed now. We're going to need to enhance nova
client to understand micro versions instead. But for now v2.1 should look just
like v2
Chris
--
Best regards,
Andrey
+1
Sent from my iPad
On 22 Nov 2014, at 4:56 am, Matthew Treinish mtrein...@kortar.org wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I'd like to propose we add Ghanshyam Mann (gmann) to the tempest core team.
Over
the past couple of cycles Ghanshyam has been actively engaged in the Tempest
community.
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:47:16 +0100
Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com wrote:
Aloha guardians of the API!
I haven recently* reviewed a spec for neutron [1] proposing a
distinct URI for returning resource count on list operations.
This proposal is for selected neutron resources, but I
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:11:40 +0800
Chen CH Ji jiche...@cn.ibm.com wrote:
Hi
I saw we are removing v2 XML support proposed
several days before
For new api extensions, do we need to add it now and
remove it later or only support JSON ? Thanks
I don't
Hi,
We have moved to alternating times each week for the API WG meeting so
people from other timezones can attend. Since this is an odd week
the meeting will be Thursday UTC 1600. Details here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-WG
The google ical feed hasn't been updated yet, but
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:34:44 +
Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote:
2. Do you know if there is a way to subscribe to only the API WG
meeting from that calendar?
I haven't been able to find a way to do that. Fortunately for me most
of the openstack meetings end up being between
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/18/2014 07:29 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 07:06:59AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
Nova currently has 197 patches that have seen no activity in the last 4
weeks (project:openstack/nova
/entry_points.txt to make my v3 api to load, but this
file seems not to be under versioning, is this file modified only after the
changes are merged?
On 11/16/14 23:55, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Pasquale Porreca
pasquale.porr...@dektech.com.au wrote:
Hello
I
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Pasquale Porreca
pasquale.porr...@dektech.com.au wrote:
Thank you very much Christopher
On 11/17/14 12:15, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Yes, sorry documentation has been on our todo list for too long. Could I
get you to submit a bug report about the lack
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
waiting extra long for valid test results. People don't realize their
code can't pass and just keep pushing patches up consuming resources
which means that parts of the project that could pass tests, is backed
up behind 100%
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Pasquale Porreca
pasquale.porr...@dektech.com.au wrote:
Hello
I am working on an api for a new feature in nova, but I am wondering what
is the correct way to add a new extension: should it be supported by v2, v3
or both?
You need now to have at least a
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com
wrote:
On Nov 14, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/14/2014 05:13 PM, Everett Toews wrote:
The liaison should be a core reviewer for the project, but does not
need to be the PTL. By
Hi,
The patch setting the time for the API Working Group meeting has
merged:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128332/
The time for the meeting is Thursday UTC
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST 20:00 (Wed)
Japan 09:00 (Thu)
China 08:00 (Thu)
ACDT 10:30 (Thu)
The meeting details
. Not sure if we'll be squeezing one in before
summit or not. The proposed meeting time patch only just recently
merged (Thursdays UTC )
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128332/2
so perhaps thats why its not there yet.
Chris
Shaunak
On Oct 22, 2014, at 10:39 PM, Christopher Yeoh
cbky
Hi,
The API Workgroup git repository has been setup and you can access it
here.
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/api-wg/
There is some content there though not all the proposed guidelines from
the wiki page are in yet:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Proposed/APIGuidelines
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:44:26 -0500
Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Steve Martinelli
steve...@ca.ibm.com wrote:
we could set up a job to publish under docs.o.org/api-wg pretty
easily - it seems like a good place to start to publish this
content.
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:36:27 +
Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote:
I notice at the top of the GitHub mirror page [1] it reads, API
Working Group http://openstack.org”
Can we get that changed to API Working Group
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group”?
That
approved by Jay
or I if it looks reasonable.
Chris
Shaunak
On Oct 22, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:36:27 +
Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote:
I notice at the top of the GitHub mirror page [1] it reads, API
On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 14:44:15 -0500
Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
I think adding APIImpact will be useful.
I also want to point to the addition of Compute v2 (haven't yet
proposed a spec for v2.1) to the nova-specs repo here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/129329/
The goal
On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:38:58 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
For stackers who are interested in different validation frameworks
to implement validation, I recommend checking out Stoplight.
Just my two cents on this particular topic, I think it's more
important to standardize
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Kenichi Oomichi oomi...@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp
wrote:
Hi Amit,
Thanks for picking this topic up,
Honestly I don't have a strong opinion about validation libraries.
Each project implements based on different web frameworks and
the options of validation
Hi,
I was wondering what people thought of having a convention of adding
an APIImpact flag to proposed nova specs commit messages where the
Nova API will change? It would make it much easier to find proposed
specs which affect the API as its not always clear from the gerrit
summary listing.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alex Xu x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On 2014年10月15日 14:20, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering what people thought of having a convention of adding
an APIImpact flag to proposed nova specs commit messages where the
Nova API will change? It would
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:57:01 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/14/2014 05:04 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
There is one reason to think about what projects *currently* do.
When we choice which convention we want.
For example, the CamelCase and snake_case, if the most project use
at 3:55 AM, Thierry Carrez
thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Jay Pipes wrote:
On 10/13/2014 07:11 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
I guess we could also start fleshing out in the repo how we'll
work in practice too (eg once the document is stable what
process do we have for making changes
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:45:44 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/14/2014 12:52 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 22:20:32 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/13/2014 07:11 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:52:26 -0400
And whilst
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:52:26 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/10/2014 02:05 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
I agree with what you've written on the wiki page. I think our
priority needs to be to flesh out
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Proposed/APIGuidelines
so we
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 22:20:32 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/13/2014 07:11 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:52:26 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/10/2014 02:05 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
I agree with what you've written on the wiki
Hi Everett,
Great to see things moving with the API Working Group!
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com
wrote:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group
This is the start of the API Working Group (API WG).
To avoid bike shedding over the name of
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 11:24:30 +0200
Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05 2014, Joshua Harlow wrote:
I agree. I think we should have documentation be part of our policy to
accept patches, just as we do with e.g. unit testing.
Forcing people to write documentation along the
Hi,
About half the regulars at the Nova API meeting are on vacation
this week so I'm cancelling this weeks meeting as I don't
think there is anything urgent to discuss. We'll meet as usual
next week.
Chris
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:57:55 -0500
Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
The os-interface (v2) and os-attach-interfaces (v3) APIs are only
used for the neutron network API, you'll get a NotImplemented if
trying to call the related methods with nova-network [1].
Since we aren't
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:32:57 -0700
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com
wrote:
Hi,
Is the process documented anywhere? That is, if say for example I
had a spec approved in J and its code did not land, how do we go
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:03:20 +0200
Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info wrote:
It seems that Python fixed that issue with 2 modules released on PyPI:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/defusedxml
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/defusedexpat
I'm no XML expert, and I've only a shallow understanding
On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:25:49 +0400
Oleg Bondarev obonda...@mirantis.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:30 AM, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
I think the expectation is that if a user is already interaction
with Neutron to create ports then they should do the security group
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 08:49:12 -0400
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
#1 - tried to get a lock, but someone else has it. Then we know we've
got lock contention. .
#2 - something is still holding a lock after some long amount of
time.
+1 to both.
#2 turned out to be a critical bit in
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 09:04:51 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/24/2014 05:26 AM, Kenichi Oomichi wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:47 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:48:43 +
Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Sep 24, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll bring an API consumer's perspective.
+1
I’d bring an API consumer’s perspective as well.
Looks like there’s lots of support
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:05:09 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/24/2014 12:48 PM, Everett Toews wrote:
On Sep 24, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll bring an API consumer's perspective.
+1
I’d bring an API consumer’s perspective as well.
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:29:26 +
Kenichi Oomichi oomi...@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
Before discussing how to implement, I'd like to consider what we
should implement. IIUC, the purpose of v3 API is to make consistent
API with the backwards incompatible changes. Through huge discussion
in
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:47:50 -0500
Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
(1) Input/Output attribute names
(1.1) These names should be snake_case.
eg: imageRef - image_ref, flavorRef - flavor_ref, hostId -
host_id (1.2) These names should contain extension names if they
are provided
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:27:47 -0500
Brant Knudson b...@acm.org wrote:
Did you consider JSON Home[1] for this? For Juno we've got JSON Home
support in Keystone for Identity v3 (Zaqar was using it already). We
weren't planning to use it for microversioning since we weren't
planning on doing
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:00:26 +0900
Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com wrote:
\
So how about just using HTTP 200(OK) only for status codes?
That would give up providing accurate internal status to clients but
backwards backwards incompatibilities never happen.
No I think that we should
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:18:56 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/23/2014 05:03 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
jaypi...@gmail.com mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com on Tuesday,
September 23, 2014 9:09 AM wrote:
_Snip
I'd like to say
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 06:48:19 -0400
Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 09/13/2014 02:28 AM, Kenichi Oomichi wrote:
Hi Chris,
Thanks for bring it up here,
-Original Message-
From: Chris St. Pierre [mailto:stpie...@metacloud.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 2:53
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 13:45:42 +0200
Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/18/2014 01:28 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/18/2014 07:19 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
2014-09-18 19:57 GMT+09:00 Sean Dague s...@dague.net:
On 09/18/2014 06:38 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:42:30 +
Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
I think in the hopefully not too distant future we'll be able to make
the v1_1 client handle both V2 and V2.1 (who knows. Maybe we can even
rename it v2) - and that's what we should do because it will prove if
we have full
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:24:29 +0100
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
- A fairly significant amount of nova code would need to be
considered semi-stable API. Certainly everything under nova/virt
and any object which is passed in/out of the virt driver API.
Changes to such
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:57:57 -0700
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
Overall I do think we need to re-think how the review burden is
distributed. That being said, this is a nice proposal but I am not
sure if it moves the review burden around enough or is the right
approach. Do you have
I'm willing to sponsor this
Chris
—
Sent from Mailbox
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Day, Phil philip@hp.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask for a FFE for the 3 patchsets that implement quotas for
server groups.
Server groups (which landed in Icehouse) provides a really useful
Hi,
I'd like to request a FFE for 4 changesets from the v2-on-v3-api
blueprint:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113814/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115515/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115576/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11/
They have all already been approved and were in the
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 23:08:09 +0900
Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for v2.1 API patches.
This request is different from Christopher's one.
His request is for the approved patches, but this is
for some patches which are not approved yet.
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 22:30:51 +0900
Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I'd like to request FFE for patches of v3-api-schema.
The list is the following:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67428/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103437/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103436/
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:13:39 -0400
David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/29/2014 10:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 08/29/2014 10:19 AM, David Kranz wrote:
While reviewing patches for moving response checking to the
clients, I noticed that there are places where client methods do
not
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 03:56:27 -0500
Joe Cropper cropper@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Folks,
Would anyone be opposed to adding the 'action' checking to the v2/v3
authorizers? This would allow administrators more fine-grained
control over who can read vs. create/update/delete server groups.
On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 18:27:19 +0200
Marc Koderer m...@koderer.com wrote:
Hi all,
Am 15.08.2014 um 23:31 schrieb Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com:
I suggest that tempest should be the name of the import'able
library, and that the integration tests themselves should be what
is pulled out of
Hi,
Just a reminder that the weekly Nova API meeting is being held tomorrow
Friday UTC .
We encourage cloud operators and those who use the REST API such as
SDK developers and others who and are interested in the future of the
API to participate.
In other timezones the meeting is at:
EST
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:52:05 -0400
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/13/2014 06:35 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/13/2014 06:23 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 12:05 -0700, James E. Blair wrote:
cor...@inaugust.com (James E. Blair) writes:
Sean Dague
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote:
From: Aaron Rosen aaronoro...@gmail.com
Reply-To: OpenStack List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 10:09
1 - 100 of 339 matches
Mail list logo
