On 01/06/15 11:57 +0100, John Garbutt wrote:
On 26/05/15 13:54 -0400, Nikhil Komawar wrote:On 5/26/15 12:57 PM, Jesse Cook wrote: We also had some hallway talk about putting the v1 and v2 APIs on top of the v3 API. This forces faster adoption, verifies supportability via v1 and v2 tests, increases supportability of v1 and v2 APIs, and pushes out the need to kill v1 API.Let's discuss more as time and development progresses on that possibility. v3 API should stay EXPERIMENTAL for now as that would help us understand use-cases across programs as it gets adopted by various code-bases. Putting v1/v2 on top of v3 would be tricky for now as we may have breaking changes with code being relatively-less stable due to narrow review domain.I actually think we'd benefit more from having V2 on top of V3 than not doing it. I'd probably advocate to make this M material rather than L but I think it'd be good. I think regardless of what we do, I'd like to kill v1 as it has a sharing model that is not secure.Given v1 has lots of users, killing it will be hard. If you maintained v1 support as v1 on top of v3 (or v2 I guess), could you not do something like permanently disable the "bad bits" of the API?
I agree it'll be hard but, at least for v1, I believe it should happen. It has some security issues (mostly related to image sharing) that are not going to be fixed there.
The idea being, users listing their images, and updating image metadata via v1, don't get broken during the evolution?
The feedback we got at the summit (even from OPs) was that we could go ahead, mark it as deprecated, give a deprecation period and then turn it off.
FWIW, moving Nova from glance v1 to glance v2, without breaking Nova's public API, will require someone getting a big chunk of glance v1 on top of glance v2.
AFAIK, the biggest issue right now is "changed-since" which is something Glance doesn't have in v2 but it's exposed throught Nova's image API. I'm happy you brought this up. What are Nova's plans to adopt Glance's v2 ? I heard there was a discussion and something along the lines of creating a library that wraps both APIs came up. Where can I find more info about this? I really think nova should put some more effort on helping this happen. The work I did[0] - all red now, I swear it wasn't - during Kilo didn't get enough attention even before we decided to push it back. Not a complain, really. However, I'd love to see some cross-project efforts on making this happen. [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144875/ Happy to help, Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
pgp0yOXS5xQjM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
