Excerpts from Lingxian Kong's message of 2015-03-23 21:11:28 -0700:
> 2015-03-21 23:31 GMT+08:00 Monty Taylor :
>
> > I would vote that we not make this pleasant or easy for vendors who are
> > wanting to add a feature to the API. As a person who uses several clouds
> > daily, I can tell you that
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Friesen"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>
> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:48:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] how to handle vendor-specific API
> micr
2015-03-28 4:03 GMT+09:00 Chris Friesen :
> On 03/27/2015 12:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
>>>
>>> Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
>>> "
>>> The first header specifies the version number of the API which was
>>> executed. E
On 03/27/2015 03:03 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 03/27/2015 12:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
"
The first header specifies the version number of the API which was
executed. Experimental is only ret
On 03/27/2015 01:40 PM, Steve Gordon wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Friesen"
So for the case where a customer really wants some functionality, and
wants it *soon* rather than waiting for it to get merged upstream, what is
the recommended implementation path for a vendor?
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Friesen"
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>
> On 03/27/2015 12:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
> >> To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
> >>
> >> Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
> >> "
> >> The first header specifies
On 03/27/2015 03:03 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 03/27/2015 12:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>>> To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
>>>
>>> Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
>>> "
>>> The first header specifies the version number of the API which was
>>> executed. Ex
On 03/27/2015 12:44 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
"
The first header specifies the version number of the API which was
executed. Experimental is only returned if the operator has made a
modification
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Friesen"
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>
> Haven't seen any responses to this.
>
> As I see it, nova is really pushing for interoperability, but what is a
> vendor
> supposed to do when they have customers asking for extensions to the existi
> To quote John from an earlier email in this thread:
>
> Its worth noting, we do have the "experimental" flag:
> "
> The first header specifies the version number of the API which was
> executed. Experimental is only returned if the operator has made a
> modification to the API behaviour that is
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Chris Friesen
wrote:
> On 03/24/2015 11:10 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>> On 03/24/2015 07:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/24/2015 09:11 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>>>
On 2015-03-23 22:34:17 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote:
> How would that be
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> As I see it, nova is really pushing for interoperability, but what is a
> vendor supposed to do when they have customers asking for extensions to the
> existing behaviour, and they want it in a month rather than the 6-9 months
> it might ta
On 03/24/2015 11:10 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
On 03/24/2015 07:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/24/2015 09:11 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-03-23 22:34:17 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote:
How would that be expected to work for things where it's
fundamentally just a minor extension to an ex
On 03/24/2015 07:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/24/2015 09:11 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2015-03-23 22:34:17 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote:
How would that be expected to work for things where it's
fundamentally just a minor extension to an existing nova API?
(Exposing additional informat
On 03/24/2015 09:11 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2015-03-23 22:34:17 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote:
>> How would that be expected to work for things where it's
>> fundamentally just a minor extension to an existing nova API?
>> (Exposing additional information as part of "nova show", for
>>
On 2015-03-23 22:34:17 -0600 (-0600), Chris Friesen wrote:
> How would that be expected to work for things where it's
> fundamentally just a minor extension to an existing nova API?
> (Exposing additional information as part of "nova show", for
> example.)
Conversely, how do you recommend users of
On 03/23/2015 03:28 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
We are not stopping vendor specific API endpoints, that appear
separately in the keystone catalog. Certainly, thats where I hope
things that would never go upstream will move to.
How would that be expected to work for things where it's fundamentally
2015-03-21 23:31 GMT+08:00 Monty Taylor :
> I would vote that we not make this pleasant or easy for vendors who are
> wanting to add a feature to the API. As a person who uses several clouds
> daily, I can tell you that a vendor chosing to do that is VERY mean to
> users, and provides absolutely n
On 03/21/2015 12:12 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Monty Taylor mailto:mord...@inaugust.com>> wrote:
On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I
> noticed something that
On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I
> noticed something that may be problematic.
>
> The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonically increasing
> MAX_API_VERSION value in "nova/api/openstack/api_ve
On 21 March 2015 at 18:12, Joe Gordon wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>> On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I
>> > noticed something that may be problematic.
>> >
>> > The
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I
> > noticed something that may be problematic.
> >
> > The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonical
On 03/21/2015 01:21 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I
> noticed something that may be problematic.
>
> The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonically increasing
> MAX_API_VERSION value in "nova/api/openstack/api_ve
Hi,
I've recently been playing around a bit with API microversions and I noticed
something that may be problematic.
The way microversions are handled, there is a monotonically increasing
MAX_API_VERSION value in "nova/api/openstack/api_version_request.py". When you
want to make a change you
24 matches
Mail list logo
