On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:10:41 -0500
Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
Thoughts on getting consistency across all 3 projects (and possibly
others)?
Yeah, I personally like the second option as well, but agree that
consistency is the key (pun intended) here.
I would say let's make a
I've got no strong preferences on which we go for, but agree they should be
consistent. The internal python library options should also be consistent.
On 5 January 2015 at 20:52, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09:13 Mon 05 Jan , Steven Kaufer wrote:
Giving that each of these 3
On 01/05/2015 10:13 AM, Steven Kaufer wrote:
The nova, cinder, and glance REST APIs support listing instances,
volumes, and images in a specific order. In general, the REST API
supports something like:
?sort_key=key1sort_dir=ascsort_key=key2sort_dir=desc
This sorts the results using 'key1'
On 09:13 Mon 05 Jan , Steven Kaufer wrote:
Giving that each of these 3 clients will be supporting client-side sorting
in kilo, it seems that we should get this implemented in a consistent
manner. It seems that the 2 options are either:
--sort-key key1 --sort-dir desc --sort-key key2
The nova, cinder, and glance REST APIs support listing instances, volumes,
and images in a specific order. In general, the REST API supports
something like:
?sort_key=key1sort_dir=ascsort_key=key2sort_dir=desc
This sorts the results using 'key1' as the primary key (in ascending
order),
