Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Matt Riedemann]

On 7/17/2014 5:48 PM, Steve Baker wrote:

On 18/07/14 00:44, Joe Gordon wrote:




On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Steve Baker mailto:sba...@redhat.com>> wrote:

On 12/07/14 09:25, Joe Gordon wrote:




On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Jeremy Stanley
mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org>> wrote:

On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is
affected as
> well.
[...]

I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat
jobs run
against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software...
branchless
tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of
changes
in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
project.


We actually do have some tests for backwards compatibility, and
they all passed. Presumably because both heat and horizon have
poor integration test.

We ran

  * check-tempest-dsvm-full-havana


SUCCESS in 40m 47s (non-voting)
  * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-havana


SUCCESS in 36m 17s (non-voting)
  * check-tempest-dsvm-full-icehouse


SUCCESS in 53m 05s
  * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-icehouse


SUCCESS in 57m 28s


on the offending patches (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94166/)

Infra patch that added these tests:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80698/



Heat-proper would have continued working fine with novaclient
2.18.0. The regression was with raising novaclient exceptions,
which is only required in our unit tests. I saw this break coming
and switched to raising via from_response
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97977/22/heat/tests/v1_1/fakes.py

Unit tests tend to deal with more internals of client libraries
just for mocking purposes, and there have been multiple breaks in
unit tests for heat and horizon when client libraries make
internal changes.

This could be avoided if the client gate jobs run the unit tests
for the projects which consume them.

That may work but isn't this exactly what integration testing is for?

If you mean tempest then no, this is different.

Client projects have done a good job of keeping their public library
APIs stable. An exception type is public API, but the constructor for
raising that type arguably is more of a gray area since only the client
library should be raising its own exceptions.

However heat and horizon unit tests need to raise client exceptions to
test their own error condition handling, so exception constructors could
be considered public API, but only for unit test mocking in other projects.

This problem couldn't have been caught in an integration test because
nothing outside the unit tests directly raises a client exception.

There have been other breakages where internal client library changes
have broken the mocking in our unit tests (I recall a neutronclient
internal refactor).

In many cases the cause may be inappropriate mocking in the unit tests,
but that is cold comfort when the gates break when a client library is
released.

Maybe we can just start with adding heat and horizon to the check jobs
of the clients they consume, but the following should also be considered:
grep "python-.*client" */requirements.txt

This could give client libraries more confidence that internal changes
don't break anything, and allows them to fix mocking in other projects
before their changes land.



___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



I don't think we should have to change the gate jobs just so that other 
projects can test against the internals of their dependent clients, that 
sounds like a flawed unit test design to me.


Looking at 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97977/22/heat/tests/v1_1/fakes.py for 
example, why is a fake_exception needed to mock out novaclient's 
NotFound exception?  A better way to do this is that whatever is 
expecting to raise the NotFound should use mock with a side_effect to 
raise novaclient.exceptions.NotFound, then mock handles the spec being 
set on the mock and you don't have to worry about the internal 
construction of the exception class in your unit tests.


--

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Steve Baker]

On 18/07/14 00:44, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Steve Baker  > wrote:
>
> On 12/07/14 09:25, Joe Gordon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Jeremy Stanley
>> mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
>> > this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is
>> affected as
>> > well.
>> [...]
>>
>> I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
>> framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat
>> jobs run
>> against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software...
>> branchless
>> tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of
>> changes
>> in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
>> project.
>>
>>
>> We actually do have some tests for backwards compatibility, and
>> they all passed. Presumably because both heat and horizon have
>> poor integration test.
>>
>> We ran 
>>
>>   * check-tempest-dsvm-full-havana
>> 
>> 
>>  SUCCESS in
>> 40m 47s (non-voting)
>>   * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-havana
>> 
>> 
>>  SUCCESS in
>> 36m 17s (non-voting)
>>   * check-tempest-dsvm-full-icehouse
>> 
>> 
>>  SUCCESS in
>> 53m 05s
>>   * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-icehouse
>> 
>> 
>>  SUCCESS in
>> 57m 28s
>>
>>
>> on the offending patches (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94166/)
>>  
>>
>> Infra patch that added these tests:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80698/
>>
>>
> Heat-proper would have continued working fine with novaclient
> 2.18.0. The regression was with raising novaclient exceptions,
> which is only required in our unit tests. I saw this break coming
> and switched to raising via from_response
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97977/22/heat/tests/v1_1/fakes.py
>
> Unit tests tend to deal with more internals of client libraries
> just for mocking purposes, and there have been multiple breaks in
> unit tests for heat and horizon when client libraries make
> internal changes.
>
> This could be avoided if the client gate jobs run the unit tests
> for the projects which consume them.
>
>  
> That may work but isn't this exactly what integration testing is for? 
>  
If you mean tempest then no, this is different.

Client projects have done a good job of keeping their public library
APIs stable. An exception type is public API, but the constructor for
raising that type arguably is more of a gray area since only the client
library should be raising its own exceptions.

However heat and horizon unit tests need to raise client exceptions to
test their own error condition handling, so exception constructors could
be considered public API, but only for unit test mocking in other projects.

This problem couldn't have been caught in an integration test because
nothing outside the unit tests directly raises a client exception.

There have been other breakages where internal client library changes
have broken the mocking in our unit tests (I recall a neutronclient
internal refactor).

In many cases the cause may be inappropriate mocking in the unit tests,
but that is cold comfort when the gates break when a client library is
released.

Maybe we can just start with adding heat and horizon to the check jobs
of the clients they consume, but the following should also be considered:
grep "python-.*client" */requirements.txt

This could give client libraries more confidence that internal changes
don't break anything, and allows them to fix mocking in other projects
before their changes land.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Joe Gordon]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:28 PM, Steve Baker  wrote:

>  On 12/07/14 09:25, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Jeremy Stanley  wrote:
>
>> On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
>> > this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as
>> > well.
>>  [...]
>>
>> I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
>> framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat jobs run
>> against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software... branchless
>> tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of changes
>> in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
>> project.
>>
>
>  We actually do have some tests for backwards compatibility, and they all
> passed. Presumably because both heat and horizon have poor integration test.
>
>  We ran
>
>
>- check-tempest-dsvm-full-havana
>
> 
> SUCCESS in 40m 47s (non-voting)
>- check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-havana
>
> 
> SUCCESS in 36m 17s (non-voting)
>- check-tempest-dsvm-full-icehouse
>
> 
> SUCCESS in 53m 05s
>- check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-icehouse
>
> 
> SUCCESS in 57m 28s
>
>
>  on the offending patches (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94166/)
>
>
>  Infra patch that added these tests:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80698/
>
>
>   Heat-proper would have continued working fine with novaclient 2.18.0.
> The regression was with raising novaclient exceptions, which is only
> required in our unit tests. I saw this break coming and switched to raising
> via from_response
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97977/22/heat/tests/v1_1/fakes.py
>
> Unit tests tend to deal with more internals of client libraries just for
> mocking purposes, and there have been multiple breaks in unit tests for
> heat and horizon when client libraries make internal changes.
>
> This could be avoided if the client gate jobs run the unit tests for the
> projects which consume them.
>

That may work but isn't this exactly what integration testing is for?


> ___
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Steve Baker]

On 12/07/14 09:25, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Jeremy Stanley  > wrote:
>
> On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
> > this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as
> > well.
> [...]
>
> I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
> framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat jobs run
> against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software... branchless
> tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of changes
> in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
> project.
>
>
> We actually do have some tests for backwards compatibility, and they
> all passed. Presumably because both heat and horizon have poor
> integration test.
>
> We ran 
>
>   * check-tempest-dsvm-full-havana
> 
> 
>  SUCCESS in
> 40m 47s (non-voting)
>   * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-havana
> 
> 
>  SUCCESS in
> 36m 17s (non-voting)
>   * check-tempest-dsvm-full-icehouse
> 
> 
>  SUCCESS in
> 53m 05s
>   * check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-icehouse
> 
> 
>  SUCCESS in
> 57m 28s
>
>
> on the offending patches (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94166/)
>  
>
> Infra patch that added these tests:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80698/
>
>
Heat-proper would have continued working fine with novaclient 2.18.0.
The regression was with raising novaclient exceptions, which is only
required in our unit tests. I saw this break coming and switched to
raising via from_response
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97977/22/heat/tests/v1_1/fakes.py

Unit tests tend to deal with more internals of client libraries just for
mocking purposes, and there have been multiple breaks in unit tests for
heat and horizon when client libraries make internal changes.

This could be avoided if the client gate jobs run the unit tests for the
projects which consume them.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Michael Still]

Ok, I just released 2.18.1 to address this issue.
https://launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+milestone/2.18.1

Cheers,
Michael

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Michael Still  wrote:
> I can do another release once https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106447/ merges.
>
> Michael
>
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Russell Bryant  wrote:
>> On 07/11/2014 01:27 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2014 05:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:
>> Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
>> travelling.
>>
>> This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
>> for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
>> client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
>> release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
>> bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
>> release is a bit bigger than it should me.
>>
>> I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
>> but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.
>>
>> Michael
>>
> Cough,
>
> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.
>
> For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596

 The same bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1340596) will be used to
 track Heat tasks as well.

>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing this out.  These non-backwards compatible changes
>>> should not have been merged, IMO.  They really should have waited until
>>> a v2.0, or at least done in a backwards copmatible way.  I'll look into
>>> what reverts are needed.
>>>
>>
>> I posted a couple of reverts that I think will resolve these problems:
>>
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106446/
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106447/
>>
>> --
>> Russell Bryant
>>
>> ___
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Rackspace Australia



-- 
Rackspace Australia

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Joe Gordon]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Jeremy Stanley  wrote:

> On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
> > this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as
> > well.
> [...]
>
> I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
> framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat jobs run
> against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software... branchless
> tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of changes
> in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
> project.
>

We actually do have some tests for backwards compatibility, and they all
passed. Presumably because both heat and horizon have poor integration test.

We ran


   - check-tempest-dsvm-full-havana
   

SUCCESS in 40m 47s (non-voting)
   - check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-havana
   

SUCCESS in 36m 17s (non-voting)
   - check-tempest-dsvm-full-icehouse
   

SUCCESS in 53m 05s
   - check-tempest-dsvm-neutron-icehouse
   

SUCCESS in 57m 28s


on the offending patches (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94166/)


Infra patch that added these tests: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/80698/

--
> Jeremy Stanley
>
> ___
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Michael Still]

I can do another release once https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106447/ merges.

Michael

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Russell Bryant  wrote:
> On 07/11/2014 01:27 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>> On 07/11/2014 05:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Matthias Runge wrote:
 On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:
> Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
> travelling.
>
> This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
> for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
> client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
> release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
> bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
> release is a bit bigger than it should me.
>
> I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
> but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.
>
> Michael
>
 Cough,

 this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.

 For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596
>>>
>>> The same bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1340596) will be used to
>>> track Heat tasks as well.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for pointing this out.  These non-backwards compatible changes
>> should not have been merged, IMO.  They really should have waited until
>> a v2.0, or at least done in a backwards copmatible way.  I'll look into
>> what reverts are needed.
>>
>
> I posted a couple of reverts that I think will resolve these problems:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106446/
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106447/
>
> --
> Russell Bryant
>
> ___
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Rackspace Australia

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Russell Bryant]

On 07/11/2014 01:27 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 07/11/2014 05:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Matthias Runge wrote:
>>> On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:
 Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
 travelling.

 This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
 for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
 client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
 release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
 bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
 release is a bit bigger than it should me.

 I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
 but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.

 Michael

>>> Cough,
>>>
>>> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.
>>>
>>> For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596
>>
>> The same bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1340596) will be used to
>> track Heat tasks as well.
>>
> 
> Thanks for pointing this out.  These non-backwards compatible changes
> should not have been merged, IMO.  They really should have waited until
> a v2.0, or at least done in a backwards copmatible way.  I'll look into
> what reverts are needed.
> 

I posted a couple of reverts that I think will resolve these problems:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106446/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/106447/

-- 
Russell Bryant

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Russell Bryant]

On 07/11/2014 05:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Matthias Runge wrote:
>> On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:
>>> Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
>>> travelling.
>>>
>>> This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
>>> for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
>>> client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
>>> release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
>>> bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
>>> release is a bit bigger than it should me.
>>>
>>> I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
>>> but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>> Cough,
>>
>> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.
>>
>> For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596
> 
> The same bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1340596) will be used to
> track Heat tasks as well.
> 

Thanks for pointing this out.  These non-backwards compatible changes
should not have been merged, IMO.  They really should have waited until
a v2.0, or at least done in a backwards copmatible way.  I'll look into
what reverts are needed.

-- 
Russell Bryant

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Jeremy Stanley]

On 2014-07-11 11:21:19 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Runge wrote:
> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as
> well.
[...]

I guess this is a plea for applying something like the oslotest
framework to client libraries so they get backward-compat jobs run
against unit tests of all dependant/consuming software... branchless
tempest already alleviates some of this, but not the case of changes
in a library which will break unit/functional tests of another
project.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Thierry Carrez]

Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:
>> Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
>> travelling.
>>
>> This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
>> for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
>> client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
>> release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
>> bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
>> release is a bit bigger than it should me.
>>
>> I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
>> but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.
>>
>> Michael
>>
> Cough,
> 
> this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.
> 
> For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596

The same bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1340596) will be used to
track Heat tasks as well.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Matthias Runge]

On 11/07/14 02:04, Michael Still wrote:

Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
travelling.

This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
release is a bit bigger than it should me.

I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.

Michael


Cough,

this broke horizon stable and master; heat stable is affected as well.

For Horizon, I filed bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/horizon/+bug/1340596

Matthias


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Michael Still]

Sorry for the delay here. This email got lost in my inbox while I was
travelling.

This release is now tagged. Additionally, I have created a milestone
for this release in launchpad, which is the keystone process for
client releases. This means that users of launchpad can now see what
release a given bug was fixed in, and improves our general launchpad
bug hygiene. However, because we haven't done this before, this first
release is a bit bigger than it should me.

I'm having some pain marking the milestone as released in launchpad,
but I am arguing with launchpad about that now.

Michael

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Russell Bryant  wrote:
> On 07/07/2014 10:34 PM, Mike Lundy wrote:
>> Is it possible to tag a new release containing the fix for
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+bug/1297796 ? The bug
>> can cause correct code to fail ~50% of the time (every connection
>> reuse fails with a BadStatusLine).
>>
>> Thanks! <3
>
> Historically, at least with Nova, the current PTL has done the
> novaclient releases.  I'm happy to do it though if Michael is OK with it
> (CC'd).
>
> --
> Russell Bryant



-- 
Rackspace Australia

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Russell Bryant]

On 07/07/2014 10:34 PM, Mike Lundy wrote:
> Is it possible to tag a new release containing the fix for
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+bug/1297796 ? The bug
> can cause correct code to fail ~50% of the time (every connection
> reuse fails with a BadStatusLine).
> 
> Thanks! <3

Historically, at least with Nova, the current PTL has done the
novaclient releases.  I'm happy to do it though if Michael is OK with it
(CC'd).

-- 
Russell Bryant

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [nova] request to tag novaclient 2.18.0

[Mike Lundy]

Is it possible to tag a new release containing the fix for
https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-novaclient/+bug/1297796 ? The bug
can cause correct code to fail ~50% of the time (every connection
reuse fails with a BadStatusLine).

Thanks! <3

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev