Thanks for your thoughts, Sandeep. Replies inline... On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Sandeep More <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks Larry ! > > I really like the idea of expanding KnoxShell, following are my initial > thoughts on KIP-4 > > 1) It appears that the "Discussion thread" points to KIP-1 thread. > It was a placeholder until I started the actual thread. It's fixed. :) > 2) I like the idea of Programming Model/Definitions, like you mentioned > some use cases would be great to get jump started. Do you think they should > get their own sub KIP when the formalization process starts ? > Not sure whether that would be necessary - let's wait and see. > 3) KnoxShell Session/SSO - Headless scripts would be cool. Also, do you > think KnoxShell should retain some state data i.e. say command_1 returns a > json, then command_2 might use it as an argument to do something else. One > of the problem with this, other then storing state, would be > transformations (might or might not be needed) , may be this can be > something of a future enhancement. > Interesting thought. Seems this would be a way to maybe pipe output from one script to another which would lead to the development of smaller and specific tooling scripts. Alternatively, scripts that do the entire job would certainly be possible without having to externalize state or output. Seems this would be an interesting outcome of defining was is actually needed in the programming model. > > Best, > Sandeep > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 3:49 PM, larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > All - > > > > I've taken a stab at a first iteration of the KIP for KnoxShell > > improvements. > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KNOX/KIP-4+ > > KnoxShell+Improvements > > > > We should try and discuss these ideas and come up with what exactly what > > needs to be in a programming model definition and SDK and whether they > are > > compelling enough to pursue. > > > > I think that there are some exciting opportunities here when we consider > > the cloud deployments - as I've said. > > > > Let's figure out what we would like to light up in the 0.11.0 if > anything! > > > > thanks, > > > > --larry > > >
