[openstack-dev] [Solum] Command Line Interface for Solum

Noorul Islam K M noorul at noorul.com
Fri Nov 15 03:16:24 UTC 2013


Angus Salkeld <asalkeld at redhat.com> writes:

> On 14/11/13 13:32 +0530, Noorul Islam Kamal Malmiyoda wrote:
>
>>On Nov 14, 2013 1:10 PM, "Adrian Otto" <adrian.otto at rackspace.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Noorul,
>>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 7:43 PM, Noorul Islam K M <noorul at noorul.com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> > Doug Hellmann <doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com> writes:
>>> >
>>> >> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Noorul Islam K M <noorul at noorul.com
>>>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Hello all,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I registered a new blueprint [1] for command line client interface for
>>> >>> Solum. We need to decide whether we should have a separate repository
>>> >>> for this or go with new unified CLI framework [2]. Since Solum is not
>>> >>> part of OpenStack I think it is not the right time to go with the
>>> >>> unified CLI.
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> One of the key features of the cliff framework used for the unified
>>command
>>> >> line app is that the subcommands can be installed independently of the
>>main
>>> >> program. So you can write plugins that work with the openstack client,
>>but
>>> >> put them in the solum client library package (and source repository).
>>That
>>> >> would let you, for example:
>>> >>
>>> >>  $ pip install python-solumclient
>>> >>  $ pip install python-openstackclient
>>> >>  $ openstack solum make me a paas
>>> >>
>>> >> Dean has done a lot of work to design a consistent
>>"noun-followed-by-verb"
>>> >> command structure, so please look at that work when picking subcommand
>>> >> names (for example, you shouldn't use solum as a prefix as I did in my
>>> >> example above, since we are removing the project names from the
>>commands).
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > I think we should follow this. If others have no objection, I will
>>> > submit a review to openstack-infra/config to create a new repository
>>> > named python-solumclient with intial code from cookiecutter template.
>>> >
>>> > Adrian,
>>> >
>>> > Does this blue-print require to be in Approved state to perform
>>> > above task?
>>>
>>> Thanks for the enthusiasm! I'd like further input from additional team
>>members before advancing on this.
>>>
>>
>>I think whichever path we take a separate repository is required.
>
> Yip, no harm making the new repo IMO.
>

Here [1] it is.

Regards,
Noorul

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56505/



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list