[openstack-dev] [kolla] which footer format we need

2016-09-01 Thread Jeffrey Zhang 
We introduced customization solution.

Now, we support two format of footer.

1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }}
2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %}

there two conflict about this now[0][1].

I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution.

[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253

-- 
Regards,
Jeffrey Zhang
Blog: http://xcodest.me
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] which footer format we need

2016-09-01 Thread Swapnil Kulkarni 
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Zhang  wrote:
> We introduced customization solution.
>
> Now, we support two format of footer.
>
> 1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }}
> 2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %}
>
> there two conflict about this now[0][1].
>
> I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution.
>
> [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253
>
> --
> Regards,
> Jeffrey Zhang
> Blog: http://xcodest.me
>
> __
> 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
>


I tend towards #2, patchset [0] is corresponding to a discussion on
#openstack-kolla and if we keep #2, we need to keep #1 in all
dockerfiles with a deprecation warning for next cycle.

Also what if user specifies both the footer blocks? We need to confirm
we ignore  #1 if #2 is chosen.

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] which footer format we need

2016-09-01 Thread Jeffrey Zhang 
1. so i think we need add the deprecated status to the include_footer
option and print a warn.
2. when the use specifies both two footers,  they should both work rather
than ignore one. it print warn already.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Swapnil Kulkarni 
wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Zhang 
> wrote:
> > We introduced customization solution.
> >
> > Now, we support two format of footer.
> >
> > 1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }}
> > 2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %}
> >
> > there two conflict about this now[0][1].
> >
> > I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution.
> >
> > [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746
> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Jeffrey Zhang
> > Blog: http://xcodest.me
> >
> > 
> __
> > 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
> >
>
>
> I tend towards #2, patchset [0] is corresponding to a discussion on
> #openstack-kolla and if we keep #2, we need to keep #1 in all
> dockerfiles with a deprecation warning for next cycle.
>
> Also what if user specifies both the footer blocks? We need to confirm
> we ignore  #1 if #2 is chosen.
>
> __
> 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
>



-- 
Regards,
Jeffrey Zhang
Blog: http://xcodest.me
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] which footer format we need

2016-09-02 Thread Michał Jastrzębski 
+1 to Jeffrey's points. We should deprecate old footer mechanism and
remove it alltogether in Ocata timeframe.

On 1 September 2016 at 23:51, Jeffrey Zhang  wrote:
> 1. so i think we need add the deprecated status to the include_footer option
> and print a warn.
> 2. when the use specifies both two footers,  they should both work rather
> than ignore one. it print warn already.
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Swapnil Kulkarni 
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Zhang 
>> wrote:
>> > We introduced customization solution.
>> >
>> > Now, we support two format of footer.
>> >
>> > 1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }}
>> > 2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %}
>> >
>> > there two conflict about this now[0][1].
>> >
>> > I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution.
>> >
>> > [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746
>> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jeffrey Zhang
>> > Blog: http://xcodest.me
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>>
>> I tend towards #2, patchset [0] is corresponding to a discussion on
>> #openstack-kolla and if we keep #2, we need to keep #1 in all
>> dockerfiles with a deprecation warning for next cycle.
>>
>> Also what if user specifies both the footer blocks? We need to confirm
>> we ignore  #1 if #2 is chosen.
>>
>> __
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Jeffrey Zhang
> Blog: http://xcodest.me
>
> __
> 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
>

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] which footer format we need

2016-09-02 Thread Mauricio Lima 
I agree with Jeffrey.

2016-09-02 11:52 GMT-03:00 Michał Jastrzębski :

> +1 to Jeffrey's points. We should deprecate old footer mechanism and
> remove it alltogether in Ocata timeframe.
>
> On 1 September 2016 at 23:51, Jeffrey Zhang 
> wrote:
> > 1. so i think we need add the deprecated status to the include_footer
> option
> > and print a warn.
> > 2. when the use specifies both two footers,  they should both work rather
> > than ignore one. it print warn already.
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Swapnil Kulkarni 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey Zhang 
> >> wrote:
> >> > We introduced customization solution.
> >> >
> >> > Now, we support two format of footer.
> >> >
> >> > 1. the legacy way: {{ include_footer }}
> >> > 2. the new way: {% block footer %}{% endblock %}
> >> >
> >> > there two conflict about this now[0][1].
> >> >
> >> > I think the option 2 is better. We can get more consistent solution.
> >> >
> >> > [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/357746
> >> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/361253
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Jeffrey Zhang
> >> > Blog: http://xcodest.me
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 
> __
> >> > 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
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> I tend towards #2, patchset [0] is corresponding to a discussion on
> >> #openstack-kolla and if we keep #2, we need to keep #1 in all
> >> dockerfiles with a deprecation warning for next cycle.
> >>
> >> Also what if user specifies both the footer blocks? We need to confirm
> >> we ignore  #1 if #2 is chosen.
> >>
> >> 
> __
> >> 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Jeffrey Zhang
> > Blog: http://xcodest.me
> >
> > 
> __
> > 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
> >
>
> __
> 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
>
__
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