| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-sdks - 2017-04-05 | |||
| 07:56:09 | reedip | wait a minute | |
| 07:56:13 | rabel | and i thought the variable names are derived from the option name --network, --port, --nic | |
| 07:57:07 | reedip | yeah u r right.. it was destination what I was talking about | |
| 07:57:14 | reedip | so yeah, you can use dest as well | |
| 07:57:31 | reedip | that would add everything in the same variable , try that | |
| 08:00:47 | rabel | i will have a look at that. thank you! | |
| 08:07:21 | valeryt | is it possible to list the user project as in https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/identity/v3/?expanded=list-projects-for-user-detail with the openstacksdk ? | |
| 08:08:03 | valeryt | I tried conn.identity.projects(user_id=user.id) but it doesn't work... | |
| 10:27:13 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/cliff master: Add 'cliff-commands' Sphinx directive https://review.openstack.org/453383 | |
| 10:38:13 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 10:40:11 | rabel | reedip: do you want to have a look at my newest patch proposal? i know it's a bit of a workaround, but this is probably the best solution for now. | |
| 10:40:32 | reedip | rabel : Maybe a bit later, but will do :) | |
| 10:40:34 | reedip | thanks | |
| 10:41:04 | rabel | ok, thank you. :) | |
| 11:18:36 | frickler | how can I create a non-ha router with OSC? seems there is only the "--ha" option, but that is the default anyway | |
| 11:19:24 | frickler | neutron cli can do "--ha False" | |
| 11:55:17 | briancurtin | valeryt: projects probably doesn’t currently take query parameters, but it could be added | |
| 11:58:16 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 12:01:35 | rabel_b1 | frickler: ha should not be default on router creation | |
| 12:02:06 | rabel_b1 | just tried it here. "openstack router create my_router" creates a router without ha | |
| 12:03:59 | frickler | rabel_b1: which version are you using? I'm at 3.9.0 and for me that gets me a router with ha enabled. at least when I'm running as admin | |
| 12:04:15 | rabel_b1 | 3.9.1 | |
| 12:04:46 | briancurtin | valeryt: also it looks like what you’re trying wouldn’t be supported by the REST API anyway. user_id isn’t a query param it takes | |
| 12:04:50 | rabel_b1 | ah no, it's master from git | |
| 12:04:50 | rabel_b1 | wait | |
| 12:05:59 | rabel_b1 | frickler: the same with 3.9.0 | |
| 12:07:12 | rabel_b1 | got to go now, sorry | |
| 12:10:15 | frickler | rabel_b1: but you did test with a cloud that has l3_ha=true in neutron? | |
| 12:23:50 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Introduce Base for Octavia (load balancing) https://review.openstack.org/428414 | |
| 12:24:17 | valeryt | briancurtin: ok, but the keystone v3 user api have the REST /v3/users/{user_id}/projects for it | |
| 12:24:34 | valeryt | briancurtin: as described here: https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/identity/v3/?expanded=list-projects-for-user-detail#list-projects-for-user | |
| 12:24:42 | briancurtin | ah | |
| 12:25:20 | briancurtin | valeryt: can you enter this on https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-openstacksdk and we’ll take a look at adding it? | |
| 12:25:23 | valeryt | briancurtin: is it implemented, or it was just forget? | |
| 12:25:56 | valeryt | briancurtin: ok will do | |
| 12:26:15 | briancurtin | valeryt: it’s 100% not implemented how you tried to do it, but it could be supported. we don’t have a ton of keystone v3 coverage right now | |
| 12:27:39 | Guest85496 | reedip, hi | |
| 12:31:51 | valeryt | briancurtin: https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-openstacksdk/+bug/1680063 | |
| 12:31:51 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1680063 in OpenStack SDK "List projects for user" [Undecided,New] | |
| 12:33:37 | frickler | rabel_b1: https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-openstackclient/+bug/1664255 has a similar issue, seems it can be extended to cover mine | |
| 12:33:37 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1664255 in python-openstackclient "Admin can't override default "distributed" flags" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to venkata anil (anil-venkata) | |
| 12:44:37 | briancurtin | valeryt: cool, i commented on there about some options. i think what you were originally trying to do should be how it works. i’m busy right now myself but if no one else gets to it i’ll try to fix it relatively soon | |
| 12:46:31 | valeryt | briancurtin: thanks | |
| 12:59:13 | openstackgerrit | Sean McCully proposed openstack/keystoneauth master: KeystoneAuth should default to system CAFile. https://review.openstack.org/452585 | |
| 13:13:05 | openstackgerrit | Stephen Finucane proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: WIP! Start using 'cliff.sphinxext' https://review.openstack.org/452861 | |
| 13:42:48 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 14:06:40 | openstackgerrit | Brian Curtin proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Add get_stack_* methods to documentation https://review.openstack.org/453646 | |
| 14:25:25 | openstackgerrit | Brian Curtin proposed openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Clean up some errant doc warnings/errors https://review.openstack.org/453661 | |
| 14:30:15 | openstackgerrit | Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add "qos-policy" option to "port create" & "port set" https://review.openstack.org/419236 | |
| 14:44:25 | reedip | ZZelle_ yes hello | |
| 14:48:00 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 14:49:13 | reedip | rabel_b1 : hi | |
| 14:49:56 | rabel_b1 | reedip: hi. arg, i just made it worse... :D | |
| 14:50:55 | reedip | rabel_b1 : I saw ZZelle_ 's comments. I agree, lets discuss this in detail here or on the bug . dtroyer 's input would alsio be great here :) | |
| 14:51:08 | reedip | s/bug/patch/ | |
| 14:51:32 | openstackgerrit | David Rabel proposed openstack/python-openstackclient master: Add --network and --port to server create https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 14:52:06 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/python-openstacksdk master: Add get_stack_* methods to documentation https://review.openstack.org/453646 | |
| 14:53:50 | rabel_b1 | i would prefer not to discuss that in the change. here is fine, launchpad also. but on the change there is already enough, if it's only about the implementation. so i would like to keep the "what to implement?" question separate | |
| 14:55:13 | rabel_b1 | also in the launchpad bug we already started talking about that. | |
| 14:55:38 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, reedip, it's a mess to jump between launchpad and review.o.o ... let's discuss in one place | |
| 14:55:49 | reedip | agreed ZZelle_ | |
| 14:56:17 | reedip | but where ?? :) | |
| 14:56:48 | ZZelle_ | reedip, review.o.o :) | |
| 14:57:03 | ZZelle_ | reedip, the code won't go in launchpad :) | |
| 14:57:08 | reedip | rabel_b1 : is that ok with u ?? | |
| 14:57:15 | reedip | ZZelle_ hehe.. yeah | |
| 14:58:19 | rabel_b1 | ZZelle_, reedip: ok, review then. | |
| 14:58:31 | openstackgerrit | Monty Taylor proposed openstack/os-client-config master: Add ability to pass in user_agent https://review.openstack.org/452550 | |
| 14:58:48 | rabel_b1 | but maybe we can also talk about it here first | |
| 14:59:39 | rabel_b1 | since we three are here right now and we can post the outcome as comment on the review? | |
| 15:00:33 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Which patchset are you discussing | |
| 15:00:53 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : I was waiting for you to chime in :) | |
| 15:01:03 | reedip | https://review.openstack.org/444924 | |
| 15:01:38 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Oh yea. Fun | |
| 15:01:51 | reedip | :D | |
| 15:03:12 | reedip | I will be Back ... ( in a jiffy ) | |
| 15:03:16 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, reedip, dtroyer, the main point to agree is the format | |
| 15:03:48 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, reedip, dtroyer, imo, there is no reason to have 3 options --nic, --network, --port which supports complex values | |
| 15:04:34 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, reedip, let's use --network --port for simplex cases: --network $network or --port $port | |
| 15:05:15 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, reedip, if you need a finer interface description then use --nic $key=$value,... | |
| 15:07:48 | rabel_b1 | ZZelle_, reedip, ankur-gupta-f4, dtroyer: sounds reasonable to me. i think i first had in mind that --nic could be deprecated in the future in favour of --network and --port. but since those are not going to implement the --nic auto and --nic none functionality either, we will probably stay with having three parameters. | |
| 15:08:19 | reedip | ZZelle_ ok, so you mean with --network and --port we do not need to specify nic | |
| 15:08:21 | rabel_b1 | so, since --nic will not be deprecated, i think you are right, ZZelle_. | |
| 15:08:30 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, what means --nic none or --nic auto? | |
| 15:08:54 | reedip | if that is so ZZelle_ , rabel_b1 , we need to be pretty thorough in the Help Message | |
| 15:09:16 | rabel_b1 | ZZelle_: afaiu --nic none means having a nic without a port connected to it and --nic auto means looking for a network that fits it needs. but i'm not sure here. | |
| 15:09:29 | ZZelle_ | reedip, yes, --network $network enables to specify a nic on a specific network, --port port a nic using a specific port and --nic is for other cases | |
| 15:09:40 | ZZelle_ | rabel_b1, ok | |
| 15:10:38 | ankur-gupta-f4 | If --nic will be deprecated then --network and --port need to fulfill all the options that --nic supports | |
| 15:10:42 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Imho | |
| 15:11:05 | rabel_b1 | ankur-gupta-f4: yes, but it very probably won't | |
| 15:11:17 | reedip | rabel_b1 : IIUC currently --nic should have default none if nothing is specified, you might need to handle that with --network and --port as well ( i.e. if no option is specified, treat --nic as none in the body ) | |
| 15:11:31 | reedip | auto option should be with --nic only , not with --network/--port | |
| 15:11:55 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 ; it would be difficult to replacte the auto behavior with --network/--port | |
| 15:12:58 | ankur-gupta-f4 | It shouldn't be that complicated if both nic and network options are handled in similar ways | |
| 15:13:07 | rabel_b1 | yes, dtroyer said something similar: none and auto should only be available for --nic, not for --network/--port | |
| 15:14:11 | reedip | ankur-gupta-f4 : it shouldnt be, but ideally it need not be required if we have --nic :) anyways, I think rabel_b1 has reached a satisfying conclusion , thanks to ZZelle_ :) | |
| 15:15:44 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Okay | |
| 15:16:18 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Will review it later. Still seems like it is would be confusing for end user. | |
| 15:16:27 | ankur-gupta-f4 | Lets see how it turnsout | |