On 11 March 2015 at 18:21, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
...
Since there was no debate on the compat thing, I've thrown up an
etherpad to start the discussion.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ironic-client-ux
Thanks Rob. Michael Davies has a spec [1] that discusses how a
On 8 March 2015 at 13:12, Devananda van der Veen
devananda@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
Recently, I've been thinking more of how users of our python client
will interact with the service, and in particular, how they might
expect different instances of Ironic to behave.
We added several
Oh, sure - switching to the spec is fine, I didn't realise there was
one, given the list thread had gone quiet :)
-Rob
On 12 March 2015 at 12:24, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 March 2015 at 18:21, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
...
Since there was no debate on
Hi Devananda,
Thanks for bringing this up. I've seen some recent discussions about
changing our python-client so that it supports a range of versions of the
server. I think that makes sense and that's how/where we can fix the client
so that it supports requests/responses that are particular to a
and show corresponding
fields instead of all.
B.R
Tan
-Original Message-
From: Devananda van der Veen [mailto:devananda@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2015 8:12 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Thinking about our python client UX
Hi folks
Hi folks,
Recently, I've been thinking more of how users of our python client
will interact with the service, and in particular, how they might
expect different instances of Ironic to behave.
We added several extensions to the API this cycle, and along with
that, also landed microversion support
