On 02/07, David Lutterkort wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 15:35 +0100, mfoj...@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Michal Fojtik
> >
> > Currently everytime we add or remove attributes from
> > DB, users need to rerun the 'rake' task to recreate the
> > database.
> >
> > This patch will make possible to
On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 19:14 +0200, mar...@redhat.com wrote:
> diff --git a/server/lib/cimi/models/address_template.rb
> b/server/lib/cimi/models/address_template.rb
> index 41d86f6..b804396 100644
> --- a/server/lib/cimi/models/address_template.rb
> +++ b/server/lib/cimi/models/address_template.rb
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 15:35 +0100, mfoj...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Michal Fojtik
>
> Currently everytime we add or remove attributes from
> DB, users need to rerun the 'rake' task to recreate the
> database.
>
> This patch will make possible to update the DB schema
> without executing the rake
On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 18:22 +0200, mar...@redhat.com wrote:
> diff --git a/server/lib/deltacloud/drivers/arubacloud/arubacloud_driver.rb
> b/server/lib/deltacloud/drivers/arubacloud/arubacloud_driver.rb
> index 0fd8bee..7a3e974 100644
> --- a/server/lib/deltacloud/drivers/arubacloud/arubacloud_dri
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 13:52 +0100, mfoj...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Michal Fojtik
>
> The way of how we currently create CIMI entities is not
> really nice. We parse the raw JSON/XML and then we are
> trying to create the CIMI entity.
>
> Besides the code looks ugly, there is no way to add vali
From: David Lutterkort
Move the logic from Machine.create_from_json and Machine.create_from_xml
into MachineCreate
---
server/lib/cimi/collections/machines.rb | 7 +---
server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb| 69
server/lib/cimi/models/machine_create.rb | 29
From: David Lutterkort
---
server/lib/cimi/models.rb | 1 +
server/lib/cimi/models/machine_create.rb | 18 +++
server/tests/cimi/model/machine_create_spec.rb | 44 ++
3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 server/lib/cimi
From: David Lutterkort
This makes it possible to have a full MachineConfiguration object
referenced from a Machinetemplate
---
server/lib/cimi/models.rb | 4 +-
server/lib/cimi/models/base.rb | 5 +++
server/lib/cimi/models/machine_template.rb
These patches represent another take on machine creation from what Michal
posted earlier - I've had them lying around for a while, and should have
sent them earlier.
There are a myriad ways in which an object can be created, especially for
machines; I introduced a new 'ref' keyword to the model D
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 13:52 +0100, mfoj...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Michal Fojtik
>
> In case when client sent scrumbed XML or JSON body, this patch
> will make sure we send 'HTTP 400 - Bad Request' back instead of
> horrible looking 500 error.
>
> This patch also properly advertise the Validat
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 13:52 +0100, mfoj...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Michal Fojtik
>
> This addition will make possible to specify the 'required => true'
> option for all attributes in CIMI models, like:
>
> class Machine < Base
> text :name, :required => true
> end
>
> To run a check if the
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 13:31 +0100, Michal Fojtik wrote:
> On 02/06, lut...@redhat.com wrote:
>
> I really like the simplification you did. Altrough I will need to look
> deeper to understand how exactly the code works, I like it :-)
The one thing I don't like too much about what I did is that I'd
On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 14:43 +0100, Michal Fojtik wrote:
> On 02/07, Oved Ourfali wrote:
>
> ACK.
>
> One thought, we do have 'realm' defined for the Machine entity as
> resourceMetadata. Is this element supposed to work also for the
> MachineCreate entity?
Since it's something people should be a
Hi guys,
I am very confused by what's been happening on this ticket. Can somebody
explain what the differences between different Openstack providers and
realms now is ?
The way it should work is that different providers share nothing
(different images, different instances, different everything) w
On 02/05/2013 02:29 AM, Koper, Dies wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> Thanks for your reply!
>
>> I think this proposal sounds great. The only concern I have is
>> how to address retires that could potentially never succeed.
> There is already retry logic in current tests (both cimi and api) and I
> have been c
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Joseph J. VLcek resolved DTACLOUD-416.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Ronelle Landy (was: Joseph J. VLcek)
Fix with comm
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-438?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou closed DTACLOUD-438.
---
> Import SSH key into Amazon EC2 not working as expected
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-438?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou resolved DTACLOUD-438.
-
Resolution: Fixed
> Import SSH key into Amazon EC2 not working as expected
> --
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-438?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13573619#comment-13573619
]
Marios Andreou commented on DTACLOUD-438:
-
pushed with commit id #5a38b15d561fb0
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13573616#comment-13573616
]
Marios Andreou commented on DTACLOUD-443:
-
Forgot to mention - a new version of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou closed DTACLOUD-443.
---
> Openstack Provider 'Availability Zones'
> ---
>
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou resolved DTACLOUD-443.
-
Resolution: Fixed
> Openstack Provider 'Availability Zones'
> -
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13573615#comment-13573615
]
Marios Andreou commented on DTACLOUD-443:
-
OK - Christian thanks for all you hel
unsubscribe
On 7 February 2013 10:53, Marios Andreou (JIRA) wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-455?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13573611#comment-13573611]
>
> Marios Andreou commented on DTACLOUD-455:
> ---
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-455?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13573611#comment-13573611
]
Marios Andreou commented on DTACLOUD-455:
-
ACK - thanks Christian - pushed with
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-455?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou resolved DTACLOUD-455.
-
Resolution: Fixed
> [PATCH] Openstack: Adds 'launch_time' attribute mapping to inst
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-455?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou closed DTACLOUD-455.
---
> [PATCH] Openstack: Adds 'launch_time' attribute mapping to instance collection
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-450?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marios Andreou updated DTACLOUD-450:
Attachment: 0001-Core-DTACLOUD-450-update-gemspec-for-latest-openstac.patch
I cut a new v
Joseph J. VLcek created DTACLOUD-457:
Summary: RHEVm, Passing an invalid instance ID to start instance
results in traceback with 500.
Key: DTACLOUD-457
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-457
From: Michal Fojtik
Clients can now specify the 'realm' attribute when
creating the new MachineTemplate entity. If they then use
this MachineTemplate to create a new Machine, the Machine
will be placed into that realm.
Signed-off-by: Michal fojtik
---
server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb
From: Michal Fojtik
Currently everytime we add or remove attributes from
DB, users need to rerun the 'rake' task to recreate the
database.
This patch will make possible to update the DB schema
without executing the rake task.
The 'migrations' extension in Sequel will check the 'schema_version'
On 02/06, David Lutterkort wrote:
> > 2. Add ':required => true' parameter to attributes in the CIMI models and
> >then add '.validate(format, body)' method and do all the validation on
> >the model level.
> >
> >class MachineTemplate
> > text :name, :required => true
> >end
>
On 02/07, Oved Ourfali wrote:
ACK.
One thought, we do have 'realm' defined for the Machine entity as
resourceMetadata. Is this element supposed to work also for the
MachineCreate entity?
-- Michal
> ---
> server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff -
---
server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb
b/server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb
index 6e075e8..9164847 100644
--- a/server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb
+++ b/server/lib/cimi/models/machine.rb
@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ class C
From: Michal Fojtik
The way of how we currently create CIMI entities is not
really nice. We parse the raw JSON/XML and then we are
trying to create the CIMI entity.
Besides the code looks ugly, there is no way to add validation
for required attributes without make it even more uglier.
This patc
From: Michal Fojtik
This addition will make possible to specify the 'required => true'
option for all attributes in CIMI models, like:
class Machine < Base
text :name, :required => true
end
To run a check if the instance of Machine is valid or not you can do
following:
Machine.from_xml(xml_b
From: Michal Fojtik
In case when client sent scrumbed XML or JSON body, this patch
will make sure we send 'HTTP 400 - Bad Request' back instead of
horrible looking 500 error.
This patch also properly advertise the ValidationError in case
when client want to create CIMI resource but the validatio
From: Michal Fojtik
Signed-off-by: Michal fojtik
---
.../cimi/collections/machine_templates_test.rb | 76 ++
1 file changed, 76 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 server/tests/cimi/collections/machine_templates_test.rb
diff --git a/server/tests/cimi/collections/machine_
Hi,
This patch set introduces the 'models/actions' directory for CIMI
where we can store the 'action' models, like MachineTemplateCreate
or MachineCreate. I do believe these models will make our CIMI entities
more nicer and we will require much less code to handle the create
operation.
Also using
On 02/06, lut...@redhat.com wrote:
I really like the simplification you did. Altrough I will need to look
deeper to understand how exactly the code works, I like it :-)
ACK.
-- Michal
> From: David Lutterkort
>
> The 'entities' table now associates entries with CIMI::Model objects rather
>
40 matches
Mail list logo
