Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-24 Thread Ruby Loo
On 20 August 2015 at 23:19, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote: On 18 August 2015 at 17:13, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote: On 18 August 2015 at 13:08, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com wrote: HI Hi, I'd like to make sure I understand. Is it the case that ideally, if we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-20 Thread Ruby Loo
On 18 August 2015 at 17:13, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote: On 18 August 2015 at 13:08, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com wrote: HI Hi, I'd like to make sure I understand. Is it the case that ideally, if we could go back in time, we'd like to change the client so it

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-18 Thread Lucas Alvares Gomes
HI Hi, I'd like to make sure I understand. Is it the case that ideally, if we could go back in time, we'd like to change the client so it defaults to 1.1? AFAIUI, yes But since we can't, the next client that we ship/release will have the most reasonable oldest version? If so, then since the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-18 Thread Ruby Loo
On 18 August 2015 at 13:08, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com wrote: HI Hi, I'd like to make sure I understand. Is it the case that ideally, if we could go back in time, we'd like to change the client so it defaults to 1.1? AFAIUI, yes But since we can't, the next client that

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-17 Thread Ruby Loo
On 1 August 2015 at 05:16, Lucas Alvares Gomes lucasago...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, It sounds like we all agree -- the client we ship should default to a fixed, older version. Anyone who wants newer functionality can pass a newer version to their client. Here's the current state of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-17 Thread Robert Collins
On 11 August 2015 at 06:13, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, sorry for the delay. I vote no. I understand the rationale of trying to do things so that we don't break our users but that's what the versioning is meant for and more importantly -- I think adding the ENROLL state is fairly

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-11 Thread Serge Kovaleff
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote: So KISS as much as we can! :) +1 Cheers, Serge Kovaleff http://www.mirantis.com cell: +38 (063) 83-155-70 __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-10 Thread Ruby Loo
On 4 August 2015 at 12:20, Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 01:35:25PM -0700, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Now we've landed a patch[0] with a new version (1.11) that is not backward compatible. It causes newly added Node objects to begin life in the ENROLL

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-04 Thread Ramakrishnan G
Thanks for giving me a chance to vote. I don't have any experience talking to production/live Ironic using a client and only talk to my own devstack. Personally I vote for a *no* (for such a 1.12) the reasons that have been cited in the previous threads that 1) we need users to be aware of API

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-04 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 01:35:25PM -0700, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Now we've landed a patch[0] with a new version (1.11) that is not backward compatible. It causes newly added Node objects to begin life in the ENROLL state, rather than AVAILABLE. This is a good thing, and people should want

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-08-01 Thread Lucas Alvares Gomes
Hi, It sounds like we all agree -- the client we ship should default to a fixed, older version. Anyone who wants newer functionality can pass a newer version to their client. Here's the current state of things: server: - stable/kilo: 1.6 - current: 1.11 client: - stable/kilo: 1.6 -

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-31 Thread Devananda van der Veen
It sounds like we all agree -- the client we ship should default to a fixed, older version. Anyone who wants newer functionality can pass a newer version to their client. Here's the current state of things: server: - stable/kilo: 1.6 - current: 1.11 client: - stable/kilo: 1.6 - latest release

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-31 Thread Dmitry Tantsur
2015-07-30 22:58 GMT+02:00 Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com: On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:21 AM Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Excerpts from Jim Rollenhagen's message of 2015-07-27 13:35:25 -0700: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-31 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 02:37:52PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-31 04:14:54 -0700: On 07/30/2015 04:58 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: snip Thoughts? * I'm assuming it is possible to make micro version changes to the 1.x

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-31 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-31 04:14:54 -0700: On 07/30/2015 04:58 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: snip Thoughts? * I'm assuming it is possible to make micro version changes to the 1.x API as 1.10.1, 1.10.2,etc Despite most folks calling

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-31 Thread Sean Dague
On 07/30/2015 04:58 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: snip Thoughts? * I'm assuming it is possible to make micro version changes to the 1.x API as 1.10.1, 1.10.2,etc Despite most folks calling this microversions, I have been trying to simply call this API version

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-30 Thread Devananda van der Veen
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:21 AM Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote: Excerpts from Jim Rollenhagen's message of 2015-07-27 13:35:25 -0700: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-30 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Jim Rollenhagen's message of 2015-07-27 13:35:25 -0700: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage. Since then, we've had a default version for our

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-30 Thread Michael Davies
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: [snip] It seems to me we have a few options here: 1) Default the python client and CLI to the earliest supported version. This will never break users by default. 2) Default the python client and CLI to use the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-30 Thread Chris Friesen
On 07/30/2015 12:55 AM, Michael Davies wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com mailto:j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: [snip] It seems to me we have a few options here: 1) Default the python client and CLI to the earliest supported version.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-29 Thread Dmitry Tantsur
On 07/28/2015 10:51 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:01 AM Dmitry Tantsur dtant...@redhat.com mailto:dtant...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/27/2015 10:41 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/27/2015 04:35 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hi friends. Ironic

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-29 Thread Lucas Alvares Gomes
1. yes 2. no -- the client should default to the minimum supported version. We got that wrong previously, and that's what is hurting us now. So if we do this, simply shipping the code doesn't break anyone. Nobody has disagreed on this yet, best I can tell. We would still need a deprecation

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-29 Thread Sam Betts (sambetts)
After reading through this thread as a whole, I¹d like to summarise my thoughts so far: * I've noticed all these discussions revolve around existing people using the API, and seem to ignore that most new users of the API don¹t care how it used to work, and just want the full feature set without

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Dmitry Tantsur
On 07/27/2015 10:41 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/27/2015 04:35 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage. Since then, we've had a default

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Julia Kreger
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:19:46PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:57 PM Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +, Devananda van

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:55:03PM -0400, Julia Kreger wrote: So if we do this, simply shipping the code doesn't break anyone. Nobody has disagreed on this yet, best I can tell. So let's ship some code. :) // jim I'm not sure we can just ship some code, unless I've missed

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Lucas Alvares Gomes
Hi, Could you combine 1 and 4? Deprecate not specifying the version, but pin to the oldest one for now? That way users get the warnings that they need to adapt, but things keep working? Could be switched to just 4 after a few months. This is similar to what I would like to suggest. But I

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Devananda van der Veen
I'm going to reply to several emails in this thread - but separately, because they're from separate people and with separate POV, and I think it will be even harder to discern what I'm saying if I merge the contexts before replying... so bear with me ... On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:36 PM Jim

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 07/27/2015 07:10 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 03:28:49PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Devananda van der Veen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:57 PM Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 07/27/2015 07:10 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:05:49PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: I'm going to reply to several emails in this thread - but separately, because they're from separate people and with separate POV, and I think it will be even harder to discern what I'm saying if I merge the contexts before

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:19:46PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:57 PM Jim Rollenhagen j...@jimrollenhagen.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:23:34PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Devananda van der Veen
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 07/27/2015 07:10 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 03:28:49PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-27 13:41:20 -0700: So the CLI should actually break less often, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Devananda van der Veen
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:41 PM Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: Consider the CLI an auto negotiating microversion application of the python API client. And, realistically, should solve some of the issues of people running nova foo and getting cryptic errors from the server when they are

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-28 Thread Devananda van der Veen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:01 AM Dmitry Tantsur dtant...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/27/2015 10:41 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/27/2015 04:35 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage. Since then, we've had a default version for our client that we bump to something sensible with each release. Currently it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Sean Dague
On 07/27/2015 04:35 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage. Since then, we've had a default version for our client that we bump to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 03:28:49PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-27 13:41:20 -0700: So the CLI should actually break less often, and will expose the most functionality you can get out of your cloud. What I find odd about this is that I want the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-27 13:41:20 -0700: On 07/27/2015 04:35 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Sean Dague
On 07/27/2015 07:10 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 03:28:49PM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2015-07-27 13:41:20 -0700: So the CLI should actually break less often, and will expose the most functionality you can get out of your cloud.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Let's talk about API versions

2015-07-27 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Jim Rollenhagen's message of 2015-07-27 13:35:25 -0700: Hi friends. Ironic implemented API micro versions in Kilo. We originally did this to allow for breaking changes in the API while allowing users to opt in to the breakage. Since then, we've had a default version for our