Deprecate and remove the Azure Classic provider

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Hi!

Now that we have the azurecompute-arm provider and that it is quite in
a good shape (it is stable, and implements all features required by
the Compute Abstraction), we should think about promoting it to the
main repo.

There is also the Azure classic provider in labs, but it lacks several
features that have been implemented for ARM (such as the
ImageExtension) and there are no current efforts to keep it up to
date. The "classic" API also seems to have been deprecated and the ARM
one is the way to go for the Azure Compute cloud.

I'd like to propose the deprecation of the Azure Classic provider in
the next release so we can remove it in the next one.

* Do you agree to deprecate and remove Azure Classic?
* If so, should we remove it in the next major (2.1.0) or wait for the
next one, 2.2.0? it is a provider that never went out of labs, so we
don't strictly need to provide a long and conservative deprecation
path.

Comments welcome!


I.

Re: Deprecate and remove the Azure Classic provider

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

I recommend removing in 2.1.0 due to labs although 2.2.0 is fine as
well.  This matches our policy of promoting B2 and GCS to core in 2.1.0
without marking all the classes as deprecated.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 08:53:34AM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Now that we have the azurecompute-arm provider and that it is quite in
> a good shape (it is stable, and implements all features required by
> the Compute Abstraction), we should think about promoting it to the
> main repo.
> 
> There is also the Azure classic provider in labs, but it lacks several
> features that have been implemented for ARM (such as the
> ImageExtension) and there are no current efforts to keep it up to
> date. The "classic" API also seems to have been deprecated and the ARM
> one is the way to go for the Azure Compute cloud.
> 
> I'd like to propose the deprecation of the Azure Classic provider in
> the next release so we can remove it in the next one.
> 
> * Do you agree to deprecate and remove Azure Classic?
> * If so, should we remove it in the next major (2.1.0) or wait for the
> next one, 2.2.0? it is a provider that never went out of labs, so we
> don't strictly need to provide a long and conservative deprecation
> path.
> 
> Comments welcome!
> 
> 
> I.

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/

Re: Deprecate and remove the Azure Classic provider

[Andrew Phillips <ap...@qrmedia.com>]

> * Do you agree to deprecate and remove Azure Classic?
> * If so, should we remove it in the next major (2.1.0) or wait for the
> next one, 2.2.0?

Also +1 on removing this in 2.1.0 - perhaps send a heads-up out to the 
user list to see how many (if any) people are using it that might need 
more time to migrate?

Thanks for picking this up, Ignasi!

ap