> On Aug 4, 2015, at 05:49, Doug Hellmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > Excerpts from Sergey Vilgelm's message of 2015-08-03 22:11:50 +0300: >>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 9:37 PM, Doug Hellmann <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Making that function public may be the most expedient fix, but the >>> parser was made private for a reason, so before we expose it we >>> should understand why, and if there are alternatives (such as >>> creating a fixture in oslo.policy to do what the nova tests need). >> >> Probably we may extend the Rules class and add the similar functions as a >> classmethod? >> I've created a patch for slo.policy as example[1] > > Well, my point was that the folks working on that library considered the > entire parser to be private. That could just be overly ambitious API > pruning, or there could be some underlying reason (like, the syntax may > be changing or we want apps to interact with APIs and not generate DSL > and feed it to the library). So we should find out about the reason > before looking for alternative places to expose the parser. >
The idea is to have apis vs dsl generation. But we did a "everything private that isnt clearly used" as a starting point. I would prefer to not make this public and have a fixture instead. That said, i am not hard-set against a change to make it public. > Doug > >> >> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/208617/ > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
