But I'm not sure the real problem to move the modules. My understanding is
- the ceilometer package has dependency with ceilometerclient so it is easy to
move them
- all callers for using the moved modules must change paths.
The modules you are talking about are part of Ceilometer's core
On Friday, August 22, 2014 2:55 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
As one data point, the keystone middleware (auth_token) was just recently
moved out of keystoneclient
and into its own repo, partially because it had dependencies that otherwise
were not required for
pure client installations.
On Friday, August 22, 2014 4:15 PM, Nejc Saje wrote:
The modules you are talking about are part of Ceilometer's core
functionality, we can't move them to a completely separate code-tree
that is meant only for client functionality.
Thank you for the explanation! I understand your point of the
On 08/21/2014 07:50 AM, Osanai, Hisashi wrote:
Folks,
I wrote the following BP regarding repackaging ceilometer and ceilometerclient.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/repackaging-ceilometerclient
I need to install the ceilometer package when the swift_middlware middleware
Thank you for your quick response.
On Thursday, August 21, 2014 3:12 PM, Nejc Saje wrote:
I don't think there's any way the modules you mention in the BP can be
moved into ceilometerclient. I think the best approach to resolve this
would be to rewrite swift middleware to use oslo.messaging
Hi,
The main purpose of the BP is
move swift_middleware.py in the ceilometer package to the ceilometerclinet
package.
In order to achieve this moving, we need to solve dependencies
which the swift_middleware.py has.
We have the following two ideas to remove the dependencies:
(1) rewrite
I would like to realize moving swift_middleware.py from the ceilometer
package to
the ceilometerclient package. For me it is very difficult to convince users
of
installing the ceilometer package on Proxy Nodes for just using the swift
middleware
because of maintenance costs. Operators
On Friday, August 22, 2014 1:14 PM, Gordon chung wrote:
could you create a spec[1] and we can maybe hash out idea there.
[1]https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer-specs
Thank you for your response.
I will create a spec for this.
Thank you very much!
Hisashi Osanai
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:14 PM, gordon chung g...@live.ca wrote:
this idea sounds so familiar. i feel like i may have tried to move this in
the past but gave up. i actually prefer having the middleware reside in
ceilometerclient... it really doesn't make sense for the entire ceilometer
