non "queued" images is updatable with "--file" option.

[anju Tiwari]

As Image update should be allowable for "queued" images only. This behaviour works fine with "--location/copy from" option. But if we update the non "queued" image with "--file" option, it does not through any error. Non "queued" images should not be updatable with any option.

[anju Tiwari (anjutiwari5)]

Currently this only checking "the file exists or not" only for queued images. It should also checked for images in Which are in Active state.

[Alex Meade (alex-meade)]

Someone should correct me if I am wrong, but I do not think the API allows for setting data on an image in ACTIVE state

[anju Tiwari (anjutiwari5)]

hii Alex , I Think its valid for location, copy-from . If the Api does not allow this then , how the Image is updating an Active Image. If it valid from Api side then it should raise message like this :

Attempted to update File field for an image not in queued status.
    (HTTP 400)

https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-glanceclient/+bug/1220809

And you can check this also. https://github.com/openstack/glance/blob/master/glance/api/v1/images.py#L793 .

[Alex Meade (alex-meade)]

I'm not sure I completely understand. Sorry!

I think currently if you specify --file but the image is not in 'queued' status then glanceclient will ignore --file completely. Are you suggesting that glanceclient should not perform this check and it should be up to the API to return an HTTP 400?

 I agree that the client should not contain such logic.

[anju Tiwari (anjutiwari5)]

Yes Alex,
Check should be in API side not in glanceclient.

So here, API should have the logic to check the correct image status for "--file" option also as it does for "--location/--copy from" option.

[anju Tiwari (anjutiwari5)]

Correcting the Bug description.

[Alex Meade (alex-meade)]

Thanks for helping me understand the issue. Sounds good to me

[Ian Cordasco (icordasc)]

I'm very confident this has been both fixed and released.