Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Steve Martinelli
Looks like Manila is using the service name instead of type (X-OpenStack-Manila-API-Version) according to this link anyway: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/manila/devref/api_microversion_dev.html Keystone can follow the cross project spec and use the service type (Identity instead of Keystone)

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Jamie Lennox
Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just something that makes it more difficult to handle all the different APIs in a common way. On Jun 18, 2016 8:25 PM, "Steve Martinelli" wrote: > Looks like Manila

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Henry Nash
…I think it is so you can have a header in a request that, once issued, can be passed for service to service, e.g.: OpenStack-API-Version: identity 3.7, compute 2.11 Henry > On 18 Jun 2016, at 11:32, Jamie Lennox wrote: > > Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Henry Nash's message of 2016-06-18 13:14:17 +0100: > > On 18 Jun 2016, at 11:32, Jamie Lennox wrote: > > > > Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You > > really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just > > something that makes it mo

Re: [openstack-dev] [murano] Nominating Alexander Tivelkov and Zhu Rong for murano cores

2016-06-18 Thread aaronzhu1121
Thanks, folks! I will do my best! Regards, Zhu Rong__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Chris Dent
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, Jamie Lennox wrote: Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just something that makes it more difficult to handle all the different APIs in a common way. The basic idea is so that

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Grenade non-voting test results

2016-06-18 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 08:23:05PM +, Jay Faulkner wrote: > +1 lets get it voting. Feel free to add me as a reviewer to the > project-config patch to make the change if you want me to vote officially :). Agree. I did the thing :) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/331422/1 // jim > > > Tha

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Ravi, Goutham
True, manila is currently using the same header; but given that nova and ironic are supporting the new header recommendation, this has come up for discussion in the manila community. In any case, the use of the prefix “X-“, and project names within the header is not recommended. Please refer to

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] Proposing two new cores

2016-06-18 Thread Jim Rollenhagen
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:12:31AM -0400, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose Jay Faulkner (JayF) and Sam Betts (sambetts) for the > ironic-core team. > > Jay has been in the community as long as I have, has been IPA and > ironic-specs core for quite some time. His background

Re: [openstack-dev] [daisycloud-core] IRC weekly meeting logistics

2016-06-18 Thread jason
Got your mail late. It is OK, Have a nice weekend. I will send meet minutes after meeting. On Jun 17, 2016 12:26 PM, "Jaivish Kothari" < janonymous.codevult...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Daisy Team, > > It is my honor to become a part of team,Unfortunately i had to leave the > town for Client meeting

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][nova][defcore] Add option to disable some strict response checking for interop testing

2016-06-18 Thread Mike Perez
On 23:53 Jun 17, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:26:49PM -0700, Mike Perez wrote: > > On 15:12 Jun 14, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > I don't think backwards compatibility policies really apply to what what > > > define > > > as the set of tests that as a community we are sa

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][nova][defcore] Add option to disable some strict response checking for interop testing

2016-06-18 Thread Matt Riedemann
On 6/14/2016 6:19 PM, Chris Hoge wrote: One would hope that micro-versions would be able to address this exact issue for vendors by giving them a means to propose optional but well-defined API response additions (not extensions) that are defined upstream and usable by all vendors. If it’s not too

Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][nova][defcore] Add option to disable some strict response checking for interop testing

2016-06-18 Thread Matt Riedemann
On 6/14/2016 6:37 PM, Chris Hoge wrote: I’m beginning to wonder if we need to make DefCore use release branches then back-port bug-fixes and relevant features additions as necessary. To clarify, do you mean use release branches from the upstream repos? Because if DefCore is supporting 2 years

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

2016-06-18 Thread Steve Martinelli
Recapping... - ensure we are not using X- in the header - use the service type, not name For keystone it would be: OpenStack-API-Version: identity 3.7 For nova it would be: OpenStack-API-Version: compute 2.27 (which matches what is proposed here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/300077/14/api-g