use __utils__ in salt.cloud #35483
use __utils__ in salt.cloud #35483
Conversation
gtmanfred
force-pushed
the
2015.8
branch
3 times, most recently
from
ae8045b
to
15ab9b6
Compare
| @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ def list_nodes_full(call=None): | |||
| provider = comps[0] | |||
|
|
|||
| __opts__['update_cachedir'] = True | |||
| salt.utils.cloud.cache_node_list(ret, provider, __opts__) | |||
| __utils__['cloud.cache_node_list'](ret, provider, __opts__) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I'm not mistaken, since this is now being loaded by the loader we should have __opts__ already packed into utils.If so, we should go ahead and modify these utility functions to simply use the copy of opts they already have, IMHO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left that in just in case someone else was using it for one of their functions in reference to something.
And then we can remove it in Carbon, instead of making a change to the function that we don't need to make back in an older release. But I can remove the opts if that is what should be done.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's fine. If you want to do a deprecation path, we can do that but let's just go ahead and merge this as it is. Thanks.
|
Left one comment in-line about optimizing this further by just using the copy of opts that we should already have loaded into the utils function, unless there is a reason to override it. |
cachedout
added
the
Pending-Discussion
What does this PR do?
Use
__utils__in salt.cloud instead of importing salt.utilsUse this for
sock_dirandcachedirinstead of usingsyspathsWhat issues does this PR fix or reference?
Closes #18419 and #34806
Should also revert #34870 when this is merged to develop, because it is not needed now that we will have opts available in the cloud utils.
Tests written?
No