On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> It seems like OSC now issues warnings if we use bits that are moved to
> osc-lib. Does it mean that now osc-lib is ready for all projects to switch
> to? If not, could you please revert the warnings? It's a bit
On 06/30/2016 11:29 PM, Dean Troyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Hardik
> wrote:
Regarding osc-lib we have mainly two changes.
1) Used "utils" which is moved from openstackclient.common.utils to
Ok, based on what has been said here I suggest we keep this code for now. The
changes were really minimal. If it creates some problems for us we can always
easily revert.
Renat Akhmerov
@Nokia
> On 01 Jul 2016, at 04:57, Steve Martinelli wrote:
>
> The crux of this,
The crux of this, as Dean stated, is if the library wants OSC to always be
pulled in (along with its many dependencies). We've seen folks include it
in requirements, test-requirements, or even not at all (just document that
OSC needs to be installed).
I tossed up the idea with the ironic team of
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Hardik
wrote:
> Regarding osc-lib we have mainly two changes.
>
> 1) Used "utils" which is moved from openstackclient.common.utils to
> osc_lib.utils
> 2) We used "command" which wrapped in osc_lib from cliff.
>
> So I think
Hi,
Regarding osc-lib we have mainly two changes.
1) Used "utils" which is moved from openstackclient.common.utils to
osc_lib.utils
2) We used "command" which wrapped in osc_lib from cliff.
So I think there is no harm in keeping osc_lib.
Also, I guess we do not need openstackclient to be
Hi,
We already let osc-lib in to Mistral but I found out that such transition was
blocked in TripleO, [1].
I’d like to ask the team to read into it and discuss whether we need to revert
corresponding patches in Mistral or not.
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/11/