On 07/08/2014 08:30 AM, Day, Phil wrote:
Sorry, forgot to put this in my previous message. I've been
advocating the ability to use names instead of UUIDs for server
groups pretty much since I saw them last year.
I'd like to just enforce that server group names must be unique
within a tenant, and then allow names to be used anywhere we
currently have UUIDs (the way we currently do for instances). If
there is ambiguity (like from admin doing an operation where
there are multiple groups with the same name in different
tenants) then we can have it fail with an appropriate error
message
The question here is not just about server group names, but all
names. Having one name be unique and not another (instance names),
is a recipe for a poor user experience. Unless there is a strong
reason why our current model is bad ( non unique names), I don't
think this type of change is worth the impact on users.
I think in general we've moved away from using names at the API layer
and pushed name to UUID translation into the clients for a better
command line experience, which seems like the right thing to do.
Okay, this was the piece that I was missing. As long as we still have
support for server group names in the clients then I'm fine with having
the REST API use UUIDs.
Consider my concerns withdrawn.
Chris
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
