[LIBCLOUD-356] Add config_drive to support user_data#330
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not actually sure if we want to always send config_drive attribute when user_data is provided.
I believe older versions and some installations of OpenStack support user_data without config_driver.
If that is in fact the case, we should also add ex_config_drive argument to the method (and this argument only makes sense if ex_userdata is provided as well).
/cc @briancurtin @alex
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That seems pretty reasonable, I've honestly not worked with many older versions of OpenStack. I'll amend the pull request based on your suggestions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, let me know when you update the pull request and I'll get those changes merged into trunk.
|
Going on your suggestion and looking through the convention in other drivers @Kami, would it be the correct style to raise a ValueError if the user set ex_config_drive to True and failed to pass in ex_userdata ? |
|
@stickystyle I think that's reasonable, although in cases like this, we usually leave validation like this to be performed by the server / API. This way, we don't need to update the code if the business logic changes and passing one value without another becomes OK (which is unlikely in this case, but still). |
|
@Kami I've updated the pull request to have config_drive as a kwarg, and didn't include the ValueError exception as I agree with you that leaving it up to the API is probably a more maintainable solution from the client side. Let me know if there are any other changes that need to be made, thanks! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably be better to do something like the code bellow because user could potentially pass in ex_config_drive=False to the method and we would still send True.
if 'ex_config_drive' in kwargs:
server_params['config_drive'] = kwargs['ex_config_drive']
|
Really sorry for the long delay (we don't get notifications when you push commits so I didn't notice that you updated the PR). In any case, this change has finally been merged now. Thanks again. |
2 participants
No description provided.