Yeah, We had a very productive discussion with Winson today and he’s going to prepare more formal specification on what he’s suggesting. I’d like to say in advance though that I really really like it in terms of what it will allow to do.
Renat Akhmerov @ Mirantis Inc. > On 19 Dec 2014, at 17:11, Anastasia Kuznetsova <akuznets...@mirantis.com> > wrote: > > Winson, Renat, > > I think that it is a good idea. Moreover, it is relevant, because about a > month ago there was a question from one guy in our IRC channel about what if > some of other 3rd party systems which provide their own client bindings (in > python) want to integrate with Mistral, how it will work. For that moment we > just thought about it, but hadn't any blueprints or discussions. > > Thanks, > Anastasia Kuznetsova > @ Mirantis Inc. > > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Renat Akhmerov <rakhme...@mirantis.com > <mailto:rakhme...@mirantis.com>> wrote: > Winson, > > The idea itself makes a lot of sense to me because we’ve had a number of > discussions about how we could make action subsystem even more pluggable and > flexible. One of the questions that we’d like to solve is to be able to add > actions “on the fly” and at the same time stay safe. I think this whole thing > is about specific technical details so I would like to see more of them. > Generally speaking, you’re right about actions residing in a database, about > 3 months ago we made this refactoring and put all actions into db but it may > not be 100% necessary. Btw, we already have a concept of action generator > that we use to automatically build OpenStack actions so you can take a look > at how they work. Long story short… We’ve already made some steps towards > being more flexible and have some facilities that could be further improved. > > Again, the idea is very interesting to me (and not only to me). Please share > the details. > > Thanks > > Renat Akhmerov > @ Mirantis Inc. > > > > > On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:22, W Chan <m4d.co...@gmail.com > > <mailto:m4d.co...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Renat, > > > > We want to introduce the concept of an ActionProvider to Mistral. We are > > thinking that with an ActionProvider, a third party system can extend > > Mistral with it's own action catalog and set of dedicated and specialized > > action executors. The ActionProvider will return it's own list of actions > > via an abstract interface. This minimizes the complexity and latency in > > managing and sync'ing the Action table. In the DSL, we can define provider > > specific context/configuration separately and apply to all provider > > specific actions without explicitly passing as inputs. WDYT? > > > > Winson > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
