On 02/27/2014 04:41 PM, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
Hello,
I think if we will use Openstack CLI, it has to be something like this
https://github.com/dtroyer/python-oscplugin.
Otherwise we are not Openstack on Openstack.
Btw. abstracting it all to one big CLI will be just more confusing when
people will debug issues. So it would
have to be done very good.
E.g calling 'openstack-client net-create' fails.
Where do you find error log?
Are you using nova-networking or Neutron?
..
Calli 'neutron net-create' and you just know.
Btw. who would actually hire a sysadmin that will start to use CLI and
have no
idea what is he doing? They need to know what each service do, how to
correctly
use them and how do debug it when something is wrong.
For flavors just use flavors, we call them flavors in code too. It has
just nicer face in UI.
Actually, don't we called them node_profiles in the UI code?
We do:
https://github.com/openstack/tuskar-ui/tree/master/tuskar_ui/infrastructure/node_profiles
Personally,
I'd much prefer that we call them flavors in the code.
I agree, keeping the name "flavor" makes perfect sense here, IMO. The
only benefit of using "node profile" seems to be that it is more
descriptive. However, as already mentioned, admins are well used to the
name "flavor". It seems to me that this change introduces more confusion
than it serves to clear things up. In other words, it brings more harm
than good.
Mainn
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Regards,
Ana Krivokapic
Associate Software Engineer
OpenStack team
Red Hat Inc.
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
