2017-08-08 22:41 GMT+09:00 Boden Russell <boden...@gmail.com>:
> On 8/7/17 10:39 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
>> If the thing you're doing doesn't fit in the mainline API, then what
>> you're doing is making a new API. Extensions just bypass the important
>> part where that API gets designed and thought through.
> Irrespective of opinions as to if API extensions are good or not, the
> fact of the matter is we support them in neutron today and as a result
> we have users that rely on them as well as the ability to interface
> (CLI) with such extensions via python-neutronclient. That said, I think
> this concern has been heard  and we will work to address it
> short-to-mid term.
I totally agree with other comments that all API features should be upstreamed.
Replying to Boden's question on the short-term solution.
If you need CLI support, you can implement OSC plugin to support your
rather than extending OSC or OSC plugin provided by python-neutronclient.
If you need SDK support, you can provide your own python bindings
(perhaps it will be most stable)
or continue to use the python-neutronclient CLI extension mechanism
(which extends methods
based on "neutronclient.extension" entry points.
Does it answer to you, Boden?
> As to neutron's longer-term goals W/R/T API extensions; I can't speak to
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)