Open Stack

Hi,

I'd like to know should we apply Pecan/WSME to the existing projects
(nova, cinder etc).

IIUC, API URLs and API parameters should be on python naming rule if
applying Pecan/WSME, because Pecan builds API URL by referring for a
module path to API method. For example, the API URL of the following
Pecan/WSME sample is "http://<hostname>:<port>/foo" for POST method.

===
  app = pecan.make_app(RootController, ..)

  class RootController(object):
      foo = Foo()

  class Foo(rest.RestController):
      @wsexpose(..)
      def post(self, data):
          ..
===

According to http://api.openstack.org/api-ref.html, current API URLs
contains "-" such as "v2/{tenant_id}/os-floating-ips". We cannot create
"os-floating-ips = Foo()" due to python naming rule, so I guess we need
to change API URLs if applying Pecan/WSME. Now there are many APIs and
Pecan/WSME will influence a lot of API design.
Are there any workarounds?


Thanks
Ken'ichi Ohmichi

---
On Wed, 29 May 2013 20:07:12 -0400
Doug Hellmann <doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com> wrote:
>
> I have -2ed several changes to the wsgi module in oslo-incubator in the
> last few weeks, and I wanted to bring it up on the list to explain the
> reasons more broadly.
> 
> At the last summit we agreed that the goal was to start deprecating our
> home-grown WSGI service implementation in favor of moving to a new set of
> tools called Pecan and WSME (
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/havana-common-wsgi). While I understand that
> we can't just drop everything and build new API servers, I do feel strongly
> that we should not continue developing new features for the module we are
> deprecating.
> 
> I don't see any other projects with "wsgi" in their openstack-common.conf,
> nor did I find any copies of openstack/common/wsgi.py in any other
> projects. I did find several wsgi.py files in different directories in the
> projects. I take that to mean that we are/were still in the process of
> unifying the various forked versions of the module, and I propose that we
> just not bother doing more work on that. Since no project is already using
> Oslo's wsgi module, I'm not sure it makes sense to bring bug fixes into
> Oslo, either. If I've missed something, and projects are in fact using the
> module, then we should continue to deal with bug fixes.
> 
> To officially indicate the module as deprecated, Mark suggested moving it
> to openstack/common/deprecated/wsgi.py. I have done that in changeset
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30972/. As the commit log message
> mentions, there is still some work to be done to remove the dependency
> between one or two of the middleware classes and the now deprecated module.
> I would appreciate any ideas about the best way to do that from folks who
> know about those modules.
> 
> As we move to the new tools, I am sure we will find new bits of code
> related to setting up those projects that we can share. For example, the
> code to configure the keystone middleware for an API service shouldn't need
> to be repeated across all of the projects. We should start a new module to
> hold those pieces, taken from the projects that are starting to use Pecan
> and WSME already. I volunteer to be the primary maintainer for that new
> module within Oslo.
> 
> Doug