On 11/30/2011 10:50 AM, Adam Litke wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 04:32:41PM +0100, Geert Jansen wrote:
>> On 11/30/2011 04:09 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>>> How easy is QMF to consume from a software development perspective?
>>>> Would it be
>>>> easy for someone to write a virsh-like tool against a QMF-based vdsm
>>>> API? Would
>>>> such a tool be able to run on multiple Linux distributions?
>>> it is supposed to have a cli console.
>>> cc'ing carl and Ted for more details.
>> I'm not sure how hard it is technically. But for ISV's, I can tell
>> you that almost nobody has experience with it.
>> But, is this intended to be a public API though?
> Yes!  Vdsm already has a 'private' API that only RHEV-m used to consume.  In 
> the
> ovirt world, vdsm needs to expose a real public API (by whatever means we
> choose) so that external entities (ISVs) can leverage vdsm directly if they so
> choose.  This API must be the same one that ovirt-engine uses, otherwise we 
> are
> maintaining two incompatible APIs.
So why not either document the VDSM XML-RPC API or work on a documented 
Pythonic RESTful replacement for the XML-RPC API in VDSM?

There's a decent thread in [1] comparing the virtues of various python 
based RESTful servers.



vdsm-devel mailing list

Reply via email to