As point, we are trying to move away from this model. Having to know the
dependencies is a bad experience in general. But with the move to eliminate
optional parts of the api, most of these become real dependencies for
keystone (a few things will still be optional eg memcache lib).
--Morgan
- Remove this requirement, no optional entries in requirements.txt, a
'deployer' has to know what dependencies the components he wants to use have
Keystone is documenting its optional dependencies in test-requirements.txt
look for # Optional ... comments in
Hello again,
i submitted a new patch set for this at
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/110722/ ,
looking forward to further reviews. :)
Best regards
Silvan
2015-01-28 10:19 GMT+01:00 Silvan Kaiser sil...@quobyte.com:
Hi All!
Thanks for the feedback!
I'll remove xattr from the requirements in
Hi All!
Thanks for the feedback!
I'll remove xattr from the requirements in my change set.
Currently i'm working on a workaround to execute 'getfattr' instead of the
xattr api call. We can asure getfattr is available via package dependencies
of our client who has to be installed either way.
I'm
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional requirements. This was triggered by our quobyte nova driver
(https://review.openstack.org/#/c/110722/18), who requires xattr,
On 01/27/2015 12:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional requirements. This was triggered by our quobyte nova
driver
On 1/27/2015 2:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional requirements. This was triggered by our quobyte nova
driver
On 01/27/2015 07:14 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 1/27/2015 2:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into
requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional requirements. This was triggered
On 01/27/2015 02:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional requirements. This was triggered by our quobyte nova driver
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:12:29AM -0800, Sean Dague wrote:
On 01/27/2015 12:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on #openstack-nova regarding how to
handle optional
Am 27.01.2015 um 16:51 schrieb Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com:
[…snip...]
a) I agree with Sean and Matt here that this is an optional dependency and
belongs in the deployment documentation and configuration management manifests
b) The Glance API image cache can use xattr if SQLite is not
On 01/27/2015 09:13 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Am 27.01.2015 um 16:51 schrieb Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com:
b) The Glance API image cache can use xattr if SQLite is not
desired [1], and Glance does *not* list xattr as a dependency in
requirements.txt. Swift also has a dependency on python-xattr
On 01/27/2015 08:14 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:12:29AM -0800, Sean Dague wrote:
On 01/27/2015 12:18 AM, Silvan Kaiser wrote:
Hello!
Do dependencies required only in some contexts belong into requirements.txt?
Yesterday we had a short discussion on
13 matches
Mail list logo
