On 03/10/2015 05:53 PM, James Slagle wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Jan Provazník <jprov...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
it would make sense to have a library for the code shared by Tuskar UI and
CLI (I mean TripleO CLI - whatever it will be, not tuskarclient which is
just a thing wrapper for Tuskar API). There are various actions which
consist from "more that a single API call to an openstack service", to give
some examples:
- nodes registration - for loading a list of nodes from a user defined file,
this means parsing a CSV file and then feeding Ironic with this data
- decommission a resource node - this might consist of disabling
monitoring/health checks on this node, then gracefully shut down the node
- stack breakpoints - setting breakpoints will allow manual
inspection/validation of changes during stack-update, user can then update
nodes one-by-one and trigger rollback if needed
I agree something is needed. In addition to the items above, it's much
of the post deployment steps from devtest_overcloud.sh. I'd like to see that be
consumable from the UI and CLI.
I think we should be aware though that where it makes sense to add things
to os-cloud-config directly, we should just do that.
Yes, actually I think most of the devtest_overcloud content fits
os-cloud-config (and IIRC for this purpose os-cloud-config was created).
It would be nice to have a place (library) where the code could live and
where it could be shared both by web UI and CLI. We already have
os-cloud-config [1] library which focuses on configuring OS cloud after
first installation only (setting endpoints, certificates, flavors...) so not
all shared code fits here. It would make sense to create a new library where
this code could live. This lib could be placed on Stackforge for now and it
might have very similar structure as os-cloud-config.
And most important... what is the best name? Some of ideas were:
- tuskar-common
I agree with Dougal here, -1 on this.
- tripleo-common
- os-cloud-management - I like this one, it's consistent with the
os-cloud-config naming
I'm more or less happy with any of those.
However, If we wanted something to match the os-*-config pattern we might
could go with:
- os-management-config
- os-deployment-config
Well, the scope of this lib will be beyond configuration of a cloud so
having "-config" in the name is not ideal. Based on feedback in this
thread I tend to go ahead with os-cloud-management and unless someone
rises an objection here now, I'll ask infra team what is the process of
adding the lib to stackforge.
Jan
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
