Open Stack

Thomas,

On Apr 22, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier at de.ibm.com>
 wrote:

> Adrian,
> 
> I also have some input on the DSL proposal that I was planning to write
> down in the next days. Therefore the question, how we plan to shape the
> discussion.
> Are we supposed to 'just' update the current DSL wiki page, or would it
> make sense to have a DSL/Discussion page where we discuss open items and
> then promote to the main DSL page when we reach agreement?

Let's link to an ether pad where we can work together on segments that need revision. See below:

> One of the items I would bring up, for example, is the inclusion of a type
> system (e.g. component-type where we only have component today) to have one
> place with all the metadata instead of repeating it in several places when
> a component of some type is used. That is one item that would mapping to
> TOSCA easier, but also will become useful quickly once people start
> thinking of a type catalog that would, for example, populate the palette of
> a drag&drop tool.
> More details and some concrete proposals when I write this down in the
> proper place …

Let's start here and see if that helps facilitate the interaction:

https://etherpad.openstack.org/heat-dsl-questions

It is liked from the DSL wiki page at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Heat/DSL

Cheers,

Adrian


> 
> Regards,
> Thomas
> 
>> From: Adrian Otto <adrian.otto at rackspace.com>
>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
>> Date: 22.04.2013 15:24
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] TOSCA support blueprint updated
>> after design discussions at Havana summit
>> 
>> I updated the BP accordingly. I will touch base with Alex about the
>> dropped reference, and raise a discussion about the delta between
>> DSL and DSL-2 as needed.
>> 
>> --
>> Adrian
>> 
>> On Apr 22, 2013, at 5:38 AM, "Steven Hardy" <shardy at redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:06:41PM +0000, Adrian Otto wrote:
>>>> Steven,
>>>> 
>>>> On Apr 22, 2013, at 4:52 AM, "Steven Hardy" <shardy at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 05:32:22PM +0200, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Heaters,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have just updated the blueprint [1] for adding TOSCA support in
> Heat to
>>>>>> reflect the outcome of discussions at the design summit.
>>>>>> Please have a look if this matches your understanding as well and
> post
>>>>>> comments if anything should be changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks again to everyone at the summit for the great
>> discussions we had. It
>>>>>> was great to meat all of you and working with you!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/tosca-support
>>>>> 
>>>>> Looks good, but I'm wondering if we should either revise the summary
>>>>> wording (and title) to reflect the narrowed scope we discussed (e.g
> "Add
>>>>> support for translation of TOSCA templates to native DSL"), or raise
> a new
>>>>> BP and mark this one superseded?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've approved the DSL blueprint (and changed the title and
> description a
>>>>> bit, I hope Adrian is OK with that..):
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the heads-up on this one. I would like to narrow the
>> scope slightly. think the scope of each format should be handled as
>> individual related blueprints. The spirit of mine is to enable the
>> addition of *any* sensible format through a compatibility layer. So
>> I would like to tweak it further to suggest that it should enable
>> implementation of TOSCA, or others. It should be possible to resolve
>> this blueprint with or without the completion of TOSCA support, and
>> the TOSCA specific blueprint cited above can reference the blueprint
>> below as a prerequisite.
>>> 
>>> Sure, sounds reasonable - my intention was just to end up with a BP
> which
>>> tracks the native/superset DSL as we define/implement it - your
> existing BP
>>> seemed like a good candidate so I modified rather than raising a new
> BP.
>>> 
>>> I agree we should track implementaion of any translation tools (e.g the
>>> TOSCA interpreter script discussed with Thomas) in separate BPs, or
> maybe
>>> not at all if it's a vendor-specific or minority format (hence
> out-of-scope
>>> for Heat)
>>> 
>>>> I also think we should drop the reference to DSL2 for the time
>> being. If we need to narrow the scope of the proposed spec, we can
>> do that in a single place to simplify matters for those trying to
>> follow where we are headed with this. I am happy to consider all
>> viable approaches, and collaborate to find the one that best suits
>> our collective interests.
>>> 
>>> Ok, I just mentioned this so as to be inclusive of all who put a horse
> in
>>> the new-template-syntax race last week - I agree we should be primarily
>>> focussed on defining the superset DSL in a collaborative way, such that
>>> when we reach agreement/consensus we can implement it and hopefully
> satisfy
>>> all potential use-cases of Heat.
>>> 
>>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/heat/+spec/open-api-dsl
>>>>> 
>>>>> We can use this to track the definition and implementation of the
> native
>>>>> DSL discussed at the summit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've made the tosca-support BP depend on open-api-dsl, as my
> understanding
>>>>> is we're now aiming to add a standalone translation tool to do a
> one-time
>>>>> re-rendering of TOSCA into the native DSL format, once we've defined
> and
>>>>> implemented it.
>>>> 
>>>> Perfect, thanks. If you have no objections to the additional
>> update mentioned above, I will do that today. Otherwise, let's discuss
> it.
>>> 
>>> Sounds good, go for it :)
>>> 
>>> Steve
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev