Could we specify that all Fuel configuration files should include all
allowable
parameters. The optional parameters can be commented out but being able
to uncomment and populate a parameter is a lot easier than having to find
the
exact name and order.
For bonus points, we could include commentary
>
> Let's do the same for Fuel. Frankly, I'd say we could take OpenStack
> standards as is and use them for Fuel. But maybe there are other opinions.
> Let's discuss this and decide what to do. Do we actually need those
> standards at all?
>
> Agree that we can take openstack standarts as example,
I have another example, nailgun and UI are bundled in FuelWeb being quite
independent components. Nailgun is python REST API, while UI is HTML/CSS/JS
+ libs. I also support the idea making CLI a separate project, it is
similar to FuelWeb UI, it uses the same REST API. Fuelclient lib is also
good id
All,
Recently we launched a couple new Fuel related projects
(fuel_plugin_builder, fuel_agent, fuel_upgrade, etc.). Those projects are
written in python and they use different approaches to organizing CLI,
configuration, different third party libraries, etc. Besides, we have some
old Fuel projects