On 9/20/2016 7:38 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
2016-09-20 13:27 GMT+02:00 Kashyap Chamarthy <[email protected]>:
(3) Do nothing, leave the bug unfixed in stable/liberty
That was the unspoken third option, thanks for spelling it out. :-)
Yes, let's abandon both reviews.
Cheers,
Alan
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I'd rather not bump the minimum on oslo.concurrency given the transitive
dependencies that would be pulled in which required higher minimums.
So if I had to choose I'd go with the nova backport with the workaround:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/327624/
Which logs an error if you don't have a new enough oslo.concurrency.
But I'm also fine with just considering this a latent bug as danpb
pointed out and let downstream packagers/vendors handle it as they see fit.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
