Thanks for the feedback. Based on it would do following changes 1. Move the src folder from core/admin to tools/admin/scala 2. Rename the binary output to wskadmin-next
Chetan Mehrotra On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 5:33 AM, Carlos Santana <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > Keep it in core some where under tools/admin/ maybe tools/admin/next/ > Name it something transient like Rodric said wskadmin-next > > wskadmin can call/exec out to wskadmin-next for new features as transition > approach as next phase. > > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 2:49 PM Rodric Rabbah <[email protected]> wrote: > >> To echo Matt: >> >> * I strongly advocate keeping the code in tools/admin, or core/tools as the >> appropriate location. This is not intended for end users but for system >> administrators and should have a tight coupling with the core system. >> >> * I would give the tool a transient name for now (wsk-admin, wskadmin-cli I >> do not feel strongly), and once all the functionality is subsumed, rename >> it to wskadmin. >> >> Note that the reason for the Scala implementation (in lieu of the Python >> implementation for wskadmin which is otherwise perfectly fine) is to reuse >> the code assets already developed the common package. These assets are used >> in the core components (controller, invoker). >> >> -r >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Matt Rutkowski <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Chetan, >> > >> > Took a look at your rather complete PR... >> > >> > My first thought was that we were trying to align all our client (CLI, >> > etc.) tooling around GoLang as it is, in theory, easier for developers to >> > contribute to and in addition had fewer Java dependencies/legal >> > complications for binary distribution. >> > >> > In terms of where it should "live" either follow the paradigm of wsk CLI >> > (i.e., incubator-openwhisk-admin-cli or some similar name) or include it >> > under a logical directory structure under main openwhisk repo. >> > >> > As it is Scala, and its function is tightly coupled to main OW (server), >> > IMO including it in main OW seems like the better choice at the moment. >> > >> > -Matt >> > >> > On 2018/06/04 06:39:59, Chetan Mehrotra <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > Following up on this thread ... >> > > >> > > There is now work in progress PR #3722 [1] which implements the >> > > proposed tooling in Scala. Currently it supports some of the `user` >> > > commands like `create`, `delete` etc. >> > > >> > > There are few open questions also like >> > > >> > > 1. What should be the name of cli. Currently its named as wskadmin-cli >> > > >> > > 2. Where should the code live. Currently its in core/admin >> > > >> > > Please have a look and share feedback related to the approach taken >> > > i.e. whether its fine to pursue this as done or there are some >> > > concerns. >> > > >> > > Chetan Mehrotra >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3722 >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Chetan Mehrotra >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> (wskadmin) could become more heavy weight >> > > > >> > > > Yes thats a concern and Python dev is more light weight. I would >> still >> > > > prefer Python for ad hoc tooling required for one off tasks. But >> > > > anything which needs to be stable and supported properly for general >> > > > use it would be better to go for proposed approach. >> > > > >> > > >> Are you considering the totality if wskadmin or a partitioning and >> > only replacing some of partitions? >> > > > >> > > > For now the focus is on DB specific task i.e. user,limits,db. For >> > > > syslog I am not sure as I think its more dev tooling and can only >> work >> > > > for local setup. Other command in wskadmin on the other admin can be >> > > > used for production setups if required. >> > > > Chetan Mehrotra >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Rodric Rabbah <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > >> My initial reaction is that it (wskadmin) could become more heavy >> > weight (small changes becomes longer edit, compile iterations) - case in >> > point the wsk cli in Python vs Go... but weighed against the benefits >> > Chetan outlined with potential for a lot of shared code with the backend >> > cannot be discounted. >> > > >> >> > > >> I’m not familiar with oak-run and will take a look to educate >> myself. >> > > >> >> > > >> Are you considering the totality if wskadmin or a partitioning and >> > only replacing some of partitions? (I understood the former, just making >> > sure.) >> > > >> >> > > >> -r >> > > >> >> > > >>> On Apr 26, 2018, at 2:05 AM, Chetan Mehrotra < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Hi Team, >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Currently for OpenWhisk admin operation we have tooling implemented >> > in >> > > >>> couple of python scripts like wskadmin, tools/db/* etc. These >> script >> > > >>> currently talk directly to CouchDB to perform required actions. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Sometime back I discussed the option to support other databases [1] >> > > >>> and it was suggested to have wskadmin support various db backends. >> > > >>> However looking into other scripts I found some of the tool/db >> would >> > > >>> also be useful in context of other backends also. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> To simplify this aspect going forward it may be better to implement >> > > >>> the important tooling in Scala itself as a separate sub module in >> > core >> > > >>> repo. This module would produce a 'fat runnable jar' which would be >> > > >>> including all required dependency and can be used as a standalone >> cli >> > > >>> tool. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> We used similar approach in Apache Jackrabbit Oak [2] where we >> > produce >> > > >>> this single jar which consolidates all the admin tooling. This has >> > > >>> over the years became primary admin tooling for us. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Such an approach would have following benefits >> > > >>> >> > > >>> 1. Implemented in Scala and thus able to leverage existing >> > > >>> abstractions like ArtifactStore >> > > >>> >> > > >>> 2. For some of the bulk db operations it would be possible to >> > leverage >> > > >>> Akka Streams to implement simpler multi threaded flows. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> 3. Easy to implement tests for the tooling part >> > > >>> >> > > >>> 4. User management operations can be done via existing >> ArtifactStore >> > > >>> feature set. So one implementation can work against multiple stores >> > > >>> >> > > >>> 5. No other runtime dependency i.e. specific Python version or >> Python >> > > >>> module need to be deployed. Just have JDK 1.8 and use the jar in >> > > >>> standalone manner. No need to even check out whole OpenWhisk repo >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Key requirement for such a tooling would be to be compatible with >> > > >>> existing CLI argument format. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> If such an approach makes sense I can work on PR to give it a try! >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Chetan Mehrotra >> > > >>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/921a0a6350a7ec3a2dc7756 >> > 4612de59104995622f8417583291f20bc@%3Cdev.openwhisk.apache.org%3E >> > > >>> [2] https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/tree/trunk/oak-run >> > > >> > >>
