Full Support of fog-core version 2

[gildub]

Fog-core is already supported up to version 2.1.0.

• Supporting latest version of fog-core would help other projects consuming various fog providers.
• The namespace need to be adjusted to fully support fog-core 2+

ManageIQ/manageiq#17997

[Temikus]

@gildub I'm very sorry but I'm not quite sure why 2.1.0 -> 2.1.2 upgrade is required. Can you help me understand this?

You are saying 2+, yet we already are on 2.1.0
If by "2+" you're refferring to 2.1.2+ then I plan to defer it to the next major release (coming soon'ish) as it requires a significant amount of changes in our test suite and is disruptive for users, see #417

AFAIK you can use the new addresses (like Fog::Google::Storage, instead of Fog::Storage::Google) in 2.1.0 without issues - the only difference is that 2.1.2 has deprecation errors. If I'm mistaken however - please, let me know and I'll do my best to come up with something that works.

[gildub]

@Temikus, that's right fog-google is already supporting up to fog-core 2.1.0 but not 2.1.2 yet.

The need comes from having fog-* projects (at least the ones we use from ManageIQ but ultimately all of them) to stay aligned with fog-core (currently 2.1.2). I said 2+ because some of those projects are still blocked under a 1.40 or 1.45 version.

The reason for specifically 2.1.2 is because fog-openstack needs it to be able to use 2+. So if any other project lock to anything prior to the latter version will create a dependency blockage.

Although the deprecation message was added later in fog-core 2.1.1, the namespace change is necessary to keep up and also make sense.

I've updated PR#422 accordingly so fog-google is up to date with latest fog-core.

[Temikus]

@gildub Very sorry but I still do not understand the technical reason behind this. Can you help me here a bit? I'm asking since I'm hesitant exposing users to #417 and overhauling all tests, references, etc. without a major version bump for which we are not ready for yet.

There should be no major API differences between minor versions (i.e. 2.1.0 and 2.1.2). I took a look into the diff and don't see anything particularly major either: fog/fog-core@v2.1.0...master

So looking through that, fog-openstack should run just fine on fog-core 2.1.0. Or was there some major bug that I'm missing?

[gildub]

@Temikus,

Fog-core 2.1.1 is required by fog-openstack to support fog-core 2.
I went with latest one, but it doesn't have to be 2.1.2 as long as it's at least 2.1.1.

BTW, check out update on #422, I've changed the namespace which fixes all warnings.

[dee-see]

fog-core version < 2.2.0 depends on a vulnerable version of excon. Updating to 2.2.0 would also solve this https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-16779.

[kgaikwad]

Latest Net::SSH versions are not currently compatible with fog-core(2.1.0)
https://github.com/fog/fog-core/pull/253
Updating fog-core to 2.2.0 would help here.

@Temikus, any updates on this?

[Temikus]

@icco - Can you take a look at this by any chance? This is connected to #422 (comment)

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked inactive and will be closed if no further activity occurs.

[brwainer]

This issue is still needed as EPEL on EL8 includes a newer Net::SSH gem, and pinning the Net::SSH version causes other packages to be held at older versions as well. Specifically for me, this issue is holding back my deployment of Foreman/Katello on EL8.

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked inactive and will be closed if no further activity occurs.

[brwainer]

bumping again. Still needed.

[tushar-kumolus]

Hi @Temikus I am now using ruby --v '2.4.6' and rails '5.1.2'
I am using fog-aws '3.10.0' for that fog-core is needed '2.2.3' its working fine.
But now when i try to installed fog-google it downloaded with --v '0.6.0' and it needed fog-core '2.1.0' but on fog-core '2.1.0' the fog-aws services not works (Giving storage deprecation and when i tried to call the storage methods it not works. )
Please let now me know How can I fix that.

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked inactive and will be closed if no further activity occurs.

[brwainer]

bumping again. Still needed.

[ekohl]

Is there a label to permanently ignore this one so we aren't spammed on a regular interval.

[tushar-kumolus]

bumping again. Still needed.

Hi @brwainer
FYI I have skip this gem instead of that I am using GCP API directly by validating service account cred.
I have created my own structure for accessing resource with their response accordingly.
U can try this link

[Temikus]

@brwainer @ekohl - sorry about that, pinned the issue