On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Kenichi Oomichi <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Hi Doug, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Doug Hellmann [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 12:07 AM > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [wsme] Undefined attributes in WSME > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:29 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Doug, > > > > 2014/1/11 Doug Hellmann <[email protected]>: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Jamie Lennox < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Is there any way to have WSME pass through arbitrary attributes > to the > > >> created object? There is nothing that i can see in the > documentation or code > > >> that would seem to support this. > > >> > > >> In keystone we have the situation where arbitrary data was able > to be > > >> attached to our resources. For example there are a certain > number of > > >> predefined attributes for a user including name, email but if > you want to > > >> include an address you just add an 'address': 'value' to the > resource > > >> creation and it will be saved and returned to you when you > request the > > >> resource. > > >> > > >> Ignoring whether this is a good idea or not (it's done), is the > option > > >> there that i missed - or is there any plans/way to support > something like > > >> this? > > > > > > > > > There's a change in WSME trunk (I don't think we've released it > yet) that > > > allows the schema for a type to be changed after the class is > defined. There > > > isn't any facility for allowing the caller to pass arbitrary > data, though. > > > Part of the point of WSME is to define the inputs and outputs of > the API for > > > validation. > > > > > > Is there a plan to release new WSME which includes new type > classes? > > I'd like to try applying these classes to Ceilometer after the > release because > > Ceilometer is the best for showing these classes' usage. > > > > > > > > If you mean the feature I mentioned above, we will release it but I > don't think it needs to be used in ceilometer. We > > designed that API so it doesn't change when plugins are installed. The > feature was added for nova's requirements, since > > the types of the message payloads aren't known until all of the > extensions are loaded. > > I guess Ceilometer's BoundedInt can be replaced with wsme's IntegerType if > new version > releases. > > https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/blob/master/ceilometer/api/controllers/v2.py#L85 > https://github.com/stackforge/wsme/blob/master/wsme/types.py#L146 > > I'm sorry if I misunderstand something. > No, you're right. How about if we wait until after the I2 milestone, to avoid potential gate issues from a new library release during a critical period? Doug > > > Thanks > Ken'ichi Ohmichi > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
