On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Matt Riedemann
<mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> There was a bug reported today [1] that looks like a regression in this
>>> new code, so we need people involved in this looking at it as soon as
>>> possible because we have a proposed revert in case we need to yank it
>>> out [2].
>>>
>>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1291014
>>> [2] 
>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bug/1291014,n,z
>>
>> Note that I have identified the source of the problem and am pushing a
>> patch shortly with unit tests.
>
> My concern is how much else where assumes nova is working with the glance v2
> API because there was a nova blueprint [1] to make nova work with the glance
> V2 API but that never landed in Icehouse, so I'm worried about wack-a-mole
> type problems here, especially since there is no tempest coverage for
> testing multiple image location support via nova.
>
> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/use-glance-v2-api

As I mentioned in the bug comments, the code that made the assumption
about glance v2 API actually landed in September 2012:
https://review.openstack.org/13017

The multiple image location patch simply made use of a method that was
already there for more than a year.

-DmitryB

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

Reply via email to