openstack team mailing list archive
-
openstack team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #04743
Re: OpenStack API v1.0 Removal from Nova
From my perspective, the 1.0 API was unusable. Prior to 1.1, everyone I knew of was universally using the EC2 API. If I thought for a second someone was actually using the 1.0 API, I would not have been silent on this thread given my "support forever" stance :)
-George
On Oct 12, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Gabe Westmaas wrote:
> I definitely get why developers working on the code base are in favor of
> this, especially for reasons 3 and 4 below. However, there are a couple
> of reasons that it might make sense to keep it, and I'd really like to
> hear from a different demographic, if at all possible.
>
> First, I'd like to hear from anyone that has nova deployed, whether its
> public or private. Are you using the 1.0 API? I know its not complete,
> but you can definitely use it to do all the basics. I can say Rackspace
> is not, but we may not be the typical case.
>
> The second thing to consider is something that Monty pointed out at the
> summit - the jenkins job that has thus far been the most successful at
> detecting functional issues in trunk is the VPC job, which exercises the
> code using ec2 and OS API 1.0. I think the fix here is pretty straight
> forward - update ruby bindings to support 1.1, and move tests to using
> 1.1. Note this won't be perfect as 1.1 still has a couple of changes to
> make - but we can keep that up to date. I think my team can handle that,
> I'd just rather this not go in until that is handled (hopefully this
> week). I also get that we have a large suite of tests where all these
> things should be combined and run, and I fully support that. However, as
> we all know there is an element of trust that must be built up in any
> functional test suite and I don't think we are there on
> openstack-integration-tests just yet, although I look forward to helping
> to make sure that happens.
>
>
> I definitely get the pain that it is causing in development, just want to
> make sure we aren't driving away users of nova with this.
>
> Gabe
>
> On 10/11/11 7:49 PM, "Chris Behrens" <chris.behrens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> +3
>>
>>
>> On Oct 11, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Brian Waldon <brian.waldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to propose we remove our implementation of OSAPI v1.0 from
>>> Nova for the following reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) Our implementation is incomplete, and there are no (visible) plans
>>> to complete it. Shared IP Groups and Backup Schedules have been
>>> unimplemented since I started on the project.
>>>
>>> 2) The v1.1 spec is not backwards-compatible with v1.0. I would like
>>> minor versions to be backwards compatible as we move forward, so I see
>>> v1.0 as something we need to just get rid of.
>>>
>>> 3) As we are trying to complete the v1.1 implementation, we are running
>>> into problems created by having to support v1.0 (specifically image and
>>> server uuids).
>>>
>>> 4) Our implementation of v1.0 and v1.1 within the same modules have
>>> caused us to compromise code quality. Working on the controllers
>>> (specifically servers) is a royal pain.
>>>
>>> I've already done the work of removing v1.0 from the code, and here's
>>> the review of my branch: https://review.openstack.org/840. I think it
>>> makes a lot of sense for the community to focus on making our v1.1
>>> implementation solid, rather than constantly worrying about how we are
>>> affecting v1.0. If this is something we don't want to do, I would love
>>> to hear why :)
>>>
>>> Waldon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>> Post to : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in
>> error, please delete it.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> Post to : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
> This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
--
George Reese - Chief Technology Officer, enStratus
e: george.reese@xxxxxxxxxxxxx t: @GeorgeReese p: +1.207.956.0217 f: +1.612.338.5041
enStratus: Governance for Public, Private, and Hybrid Clouds - @enStratus - http://www.enstratus.com
To schedule a meeting with me: http://tungle.me/GeorgeReese
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
References