On 02/24/2016 02:18 AM, Anant Patil wrote:
On 23-Feb-16 20:34, Jay Dobies wrote:
I am going to bring this up in the team meeting tomorrow, but I figured
I'd send it out here as well. Rather than retype the issue, please look at:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/heat/+bug/1548856

My question is what the desired behavior of template-validate should be,
at least from a historical standpoint of what we've honored in the past.
Before I propose/implement a fix, I want to make sure I'm not violating
any unwritten expectations on how it should work.

On a related note -- and this is going to sound really stupid that I
don't know this answer -- but are there any docs on actually using Heat?
I was looking for docs that may explain what the expectation of
template-validate was but I couldn't really find any.

The wiki links to a number of developer-centric docs (HOT guide,
developer process, etc.). I found the (what I believe to be current)
REST API docs [1] but the only real description is "Validates a template."

Thanks  :D


[1] http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref-orchestration-v1.html

__________________________________________________________________________
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


Sometime back, I too went through this, but got adjusted to the thought
that the template validation is really for validating the syntax and
structure of a template. Whether the values provided are valid or not
will be decided when the stack is validated. The values that depend on
resource plugins to fetch data from other services are not validated,
and to me it makes sense. It helps user to quickly test-develop
templates that are syntactically and structurally valid and they don't
have to depend on resource plugins and services availability. IMO, it
would be better to document the way template validate works, than to
make it a heavy weight request that depends on plugins and services.

Everything you're saying makes sense. I like the idea of it as a syntax validation of the structure of the template alone. I also like that it's lightweight.

My only concern is the inclusion of the value in the returned template. That's the part that feels weird to me, and is especially misleading if we don't have docs around it.

I'm with you on the idea of flushing out those docs. I'll ask in the meeting today on the best way to pursue that. I know I've seen patches related to updating the docs in code for resource plugins, but I'm not sure if that covers the external API docs. If it doesn't, I'll file a blueprint for that so we can track it as an across-the-board API docs enhancement.

__________________________________________________________________________
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


__________________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to