Angus Salkeld <asalk...@redhat.com> writes: > On 14/11/13 13:32 +0530, Noorul Islam Kamal Malmiyoda wrote: > >>On Nov 14, 2013 1:10 PM, "Adrian Otto" <adrian.o...@rackspace.com> wrote: >>> >>> Noorul, >>> >>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 7:43 PM, Noorul Islam K M <noo...@noorul.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Doug Hellmann <doug.hellm...@dreamhost.com> writes: >>> > >>> >> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Noorul Islam K M <noo...@noorul.com >>>wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> >>> >>> I registered a new blueprint [1] for command line client interface for >>> >>> Solum. We need to decide whether we should have a separate repository >>> >>> for this or go with new unified CLI framework [2]. Since Solum is not >>> >>> part of OpenStack I think it is not the right time to go with the >>> >>> unified CLI. >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> One of the key features of the cliff framework used for the unified >>command >>> >> line app is that the subcommands can be installed independently of the >>main >>> >> program. So you can write plugins that work with the openstack client, >>but >>> >> put them in the solum client library package (and source repository). >>That >>> >> would let you, for example: >>> >> >>> >> $ pip install python-solumclient >>> >> $ pip install python-openstackclient >>> >> $ openstack solum make me a paas >>> >> >>> >> Dean has done a lot of work to design a consistent >>"noun-followed-by-verb" >>> >> command structure, so please look at that work when picking subcommand >>> >> names (for example, you shouldn't use solum as a prefix as I did in my >>> >> example above, since we are removing the project names from the >>commands). >>> >> >>> > >>> > I think we should follow this. If others have no objection, I will >>> > submit a review to openstack-infra/config to create a new repository >>> > named python-solumclient with intial code from cookiecutter template. >>> > >>> > Adrian, >>> > >>> > Does this blue-print require to be in Approved state to perform >>> > above task? >>> >>> Thanks for the enthusiasm! I'd like further input from additional team >>members before advancing on this. >>> >> >>I think whichever path we take a separate repository is required. > > Yip, no harm making the new repo IMO. >
Here [1] it is. Regards, Noorul [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56505/ _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
