Bug 1042133

Summary: [RFE][oslo]: Support for distro release information
Product: Red Hat OpenStack Reporter: RHOS Integration <rhos-integ>
Component: RFEsAssignee: RHOS Maint <rhos-maint>
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: unspecifiedCC: markmc, yeylon
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
URL: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/distro-release-info
Whiteboard: upstream_milestone_none upstream_status_not-started upstream_definition_pending-approval
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-03-19 16:51:03 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description RHOS Integration 2013-12-12 21:07:33 UTC 
Cloned from launchpad blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oslo/+spec/distro-release-info.

Description:

Nova has support for an /etc/nova/release file which, in Red Hat packaging, contains e.g.

 [Nova]
 vendor = Red Hat Inc.
 product = OpenStack Nova
 package = 1.el6

This was introduced by https://review.openstack.org/18082

It would make sense for all projects to use this

One place this could live is pbr.

The only sticking point is we use ConfigOpts.find_file() to locate the release file. The main reason for this is because cfg knows the project name, so it knows to look in /etc/${project} ... but pbr knows this too.

However, if you do e.g. --config-file /tmp/nova.conf it will also look in /tmp. It's this latter behaviour we'd lose by not using cfg, but it doesn't seem essential either.

Specification URL (additional information):

None