Open Stack

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Jaume Devesa <devvesa at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> I think it is good compromise. Thanks Ryu!
>
> I understand the CLI will belong to the external part. I much prefer to
> have
> it in a separate project rather than into the plugin. Even if the code is
> tiny.
>

Let me summarize it:

python-midonetclient: Low level API that lives and breathes in
midonet/midonet.
                                    Has the current cli.
python-os-midonetclient: High level API that is in
openstack/python-midonetclient
                                         (can be packaged with a different
name).

Are you asking for python-os-midonetclient not to include the cli tool?

I would prefer to keep with the OpenStack practice [1] of having it
together. I don't
think developing a python cli client for the new python-os-midonetclient
that is
on par with the neutron cli tool would be that big of a task and I think it
would
make operation nicer. It could even find the midonet-api from the zookeeper
registry like the other tools do.

[1] https://github.com/openstack/python-neutronclient/blob/master/setup.cfg

>
> If you will want to just do midonet calls for debugging or check the
> MidoNet
> virtual infrastructure, it will be cleaner to install it without
> dependencies than
> dragging the whole neutron project (networking-midonet depends on neutron).
>
> Regards,
>
> On 14 December 2015 at 17:32, Ryu Ishimoto <ryu at midokura.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Sandro Mathys <sandro at midokura.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Ryu Ishimoto <ryu at midokura.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > So if I understand you correctly, you suggest:
>> > 1) the (midonet/internal) low level API stays where it is and will
>> > still be called python-midonetclient.
>> > 2) the (neutron/external) high level API is moved into it's own
>> > project and will be called something like python-os-midonetclient.
>> >
>> > Sounds like a good compromise which addresses the most important
>> > points, thanks Ryu! I wasn't aware that these parts of the
>> > python-midonetclient are so clearly distinguishable/separable but if
>> > so, this makes perfect sense. Not perfectly happy with the naming, but
>> > I figure it's the way to go.
>>
>> Thanks for the endorsement.  Yes, it is trivial to separate them (less
>> than a day of work) because they are pretty much already separated.
>>
>> As for the naming, I think it's better to take a non-disruptive
>> approach so that it's transparent to those currently developing the
>> low level midonet client.  To your question, however, I have another
>> suggestion, which is that for the high level client code, it may also
>> make sense to just include that as part of the plugin.  It's such
>> small code that it might not make sense to separate, and also likely
>> to be used only by the plugin in the future.  Which basically means
>> that the plugin need not depend on any python client library at all.
>> I think this will simplify even further.  It should also be ok to be
>> tied to the plugin release cycles as well assuming that's the only
>> place the client is needed.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ryu
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > -- Sandro
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jaume Devesa
> Software Engineer at Midokura
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 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/20151214/11b15c63/attachment.html>