[openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Tuskar] Terminology Revival #1 - Roles

Dougal Matthews dougal at redhat.com
Wed Jan 22 14:52:24 UTC 2014

On 22/01/14 14:31, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
>>> On 2014/22/01 10:00, Jaromir Coufal wrote:
>>>> On 2014/22/01 00:56, Tzu-Mainn Chen wrote:
>>>>> Hiya - Resource is actually a Heat term that corresponds to what we're
>>>>> deploying within
>>>>> the Overcloud Stack - i.e., if we specify that we want an Overcloud
>>>>> with 1 Controller
>>>>> and 3 Compute, Heat will create a Stack that contains 1 Controller and
>>>>> 3 Compute
>>>>> Resources.
>>>> Then a quick question - why do we design deployment by
>>>> increasing/decreasing number of *instances* instead of resources?
>>>> -- Jarda
>>> And one more thing - Resource is very broad term as well as Role is. The
>>> only difference is that Heat accepted 'Resource' as specific term for
>>> them (you see? they used broad term for their concept). So I am asking
>>> myself, where is difference between generic term Resource and Role? Why
>>> cannot we accept Roles? It's short, well describing...
>> True, but Heat was creating something new, while it seems like (to me),
>> our intention is mostly to consume other Openstack APIs and expose the
>> results in the UI.  If I call a Heat API which returns something that
>> they call a Resource, I think it's confusing to developers to rename
>> that.
>>> I am leaning towards Role. We can be more specific with adding some
>>> extra word, e.g.:
>>> * Node Role
>>> * Deployment Role
>>> ... and if we are in the context of undercloud, people can shorten it to
>>> just Roles. But 'Resource Category' seems to me that it doesn't solve
>>> anything.
>> I'd be okay with Resource Role!
> Actually - didn't someone raise the objection that Role was a defined term within
> Keystone and potentially a source of confusion?
> Mainn

Yup, I think the concern was that it could be confused with User Roles. 
However, Resource Role is probably clear enough IMO.

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list