jclouds-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Custine <chris.cust...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: remove hpcloud-objectstorage?
Date Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:57:54 GMT
Good catch.  Sorry I missed those!

-Chris

-- 
Chris Custine


From: Ignasi Barrera <nacx@apache.org>
Reply: dev@jclouds.apache.org <dev@jclouds.apache.org>
Date: November 10, 2015 at 5:01:34 AM
To: dev@jclouds.apache.org <dev@jclouds.apache.org>
Subject:  Re: remove hpcloud-objectstorage?  

Thanks Chris!  

I've just added an additional commit to remove hpcloud from the  
"blobstore-all" and "compute-all" poms.  

On 10 November 2015 at 03:16, Chris Custine <chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:  
> I have confirmed that the HP private cloud offering is more in line with upstream openstack
so I have gone ahead and removed the HP public cloud related providers in master. I will update
the documentation page with some pointers to the decommissioning announcement and recommendation
to use 1.9.1 until then. I think after that we can safely remove the docs entirely.  
>  
> Thanks,  
> Chris  
>  
> --  
> Chris Custine  
>  
>  
> From: Chris Custine <chris.custine@gmail.com>  
> Reply: Chris Custine <chris.custine@gmail.com>  
> Date: October 25, 2015 at 9:43:29 PM  
> To: dev@jclouds.apache.org <dev@jclouds.apache.org>, Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org>
 
> Subject: Re: remove hpcloud-objectstorage?  
>  
> HP Public Cloud actually has several other differences from off the shelf openstack,
mainly the CDN extension, some specialized rules for container names, the temp ur, and a couple
of other areas which escape me at the moment. I was finishing up migration to the new swift
provider this week when the HP Public Cloud news caught up to me, so I am reaching out to
HP to discuss this in the next couple of days.  
>  
> My understanding has been that the HP Enterprise private openstack product is more in
line with upstream openstack than public cloud was, so I am going to try to clarify that and
we can go from there. I will let you all know what I find out soon.  
>  
> --  
> Chris Custine  
>  
>  
> From: Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org>  
> Reply: dev@jclouds.apache.org <dev@jclouds.apache.org>  
> Date: October 25, 2015 at 12:39:22 PM  
> To: dev@jclouds.apache.org <dev@jclouds.apache.org>  
> Subject: Re: remove hpcloud-objectstorage?  
>  
> hpcloud-objectstorage has its own signer, although hpcloud-compute uses  
> the standard signer.  
>  
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:  
>> AFAIK the hp provider only added the endpoints but no custom apis/config,  
>> so unless they change the private service significantly the generic  
>> openstack-api shoulg be goot to go.  
>> El 25/10/2015 18:03, "Andrew Gaul" <gaul@apache.org> escribió:  
>>  
>> > Filed JCLOUDS-1026. Note that HP plans to continue offering a private  
>> > cloud solution although obviously this is harder for us to test or even  
>> > understand without access to the service. Hopefully someone at HP will  
>> > step up here.  
>> >  
>> > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 08:44:27AM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:  
>> > > +1. Let's alsofile a jira issue to schedule the removal of the  
>> > > hpcloud-compute provider.  
>> > > El 25/10/2015 5:10, "Andrew Gaul" <gaul@apache.org> escribió:  
>> > >  
>> > > > HP announced that it will sunset its public cloud offering on 31 Jan
 
>> > > > 2016:  
>> > > >  
>> > > >  
>> > > >  
>> > http://h30499.www3.hp.com/t5/Grounded-in-the-Cloud/A-new-model-to-deliver-public-cloud/ba-p/6804409
 
>> > > >  
>> > > > I would like to remove support for hpcloud-objectstorage in master,
 
>> > > > which uses the legacy swift provider. The modern openstack-swift 

>> > > > provider obsoletes the older provider and we have struggled to find
 
>> > > > someone to rebase HP support onto the newer provider. Having two 

>> > > > providers also confuses users with some accidentally using the buggy
 
>> > and  
>> > > > incomplete legacy provider instead of the modern provider. While HP
 
>> > > > will end service in a few months, I believe we should remove support
in  
>> > > > master now and users can continue to use 1.9.1 to access HP. Any 

>> > > > objections?  
>> > > >  
>> > > > --  
>> > > > Andrew Gaul  
>> > > > http://gaul.org/  
>> > > >  
>> >  
>> > --  
>> > Andrew Gaul  
>> > http://gaul.org/  
>> >  
>  
> --  
> Andrew Gaul  
> http://gaul.org/  

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message