Open Stack

Since the renaming is for types in mistral.model.*. I am thinking we suffix
with Spec e.g.

TaskObject -> TaskSpec
ActionObject -> ActionSpec and so on.

The "Spec" suggest that it is a specification of the final object that ends
up in the DB and not the actual object. Multiple actual objects can be
derived from these Spec objects which fits well with the current paradigm.
Thoughts?


On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Manas Kelshikar <manas at stackstorm.com>wrote:

> Hi Nikolay -
>
> Is your concern that mistral.db.sqlalchemy.models.* and mistral.model.*
> will lead to confusion or something else?
>
> IMHO as per your change model seems like the appropriate usage while what
> is stored in the DB is also a model. If we pick appropriate names to
> distinguish between nature of the objects we should be able to avoid any
> confusion and whether or not model appears in the module name should not
> matter much.
>
> Thanks,
> Manas
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Nikolay Makhotkin <nmakhotkin at mirantis.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi, team!
>>
>> Please look at the commit .
>>
>> Module 'mistral/model' now is responsible for object model representation
>> which is used for accessing properties of actions, tasks etc.
>>
>> We have a name problem - looks like we should rename module
>> 'mistral/model' since we have DB models and they are absolutely different.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Nikolay
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140304/afbab2fd/attachment.html>