[openstack-dev] [solum] reviews for the new API

Murali Allada murali.allada at RACKSPACE.COM
Wed Jun 4 17:08:49 UTC 2014


I would disagree that we should expose the mistral DSL to end users.

What if we decide to use something other than Mistral in the future? We should be able to plug in any workflow system we want without changing what we expose to the end user.

To me, the pipeline DSL is similar to our plan file. We don't expose a heat template to our end users.


On Jun 4, 2014, at 10:58 AM, Julien Vey <vey.julien at gmail.com<mailto:vey.julien at gmail.com>>

Hi Angus,

I really agree with you. I would insist on #3, most of our users will use the default workbook, and only advanced users will want to customize the workflow. "advanced" users should easily understand a mistral workbook, cause they are "advanced"

To add to the cons of creating our own DSL, it will require a lot more work, more design discussions, more maintenance... We might end up doing what mistral is already doing. If we have some difficulties with Mistral's DSL, we can talk with the team, and contribute back our experience of using Mistral.


2014-06-04 14:11 GMT+02:00 Angus Salkeld <angus.salkeld at rackspace.com<mailto:angus.salkeld at rackspace.com>>:
Hash: SHA1

Hi all

I have posted this series and it has evoked a surprising (to me) amount
of discussion so I wanted to clarify some things and talk to some of the
issues so we can move forward.

So first note is this is an early posting and still is not tested much.


First the terminology
   I have a pipeline meaning the association between a mistral workbook,
   a trigger url and a plan. This is a running entity not just a
   different workbook.

The main issue seems to be the extent to which I am exposing the mistral
workbook. Many of you expected a simpler workflow DSL that would be
converted into the mistral workbook.

The reason for me doing it this way are:
1) so we don't have to write much code
2) this is an iterative process. Let's try it the simple way first and
   only make it more complicated if we really need to (the agile way?).
3) to be consistent in the way we treat heat templates, mistral
   workbooks and language packs - i.e. we provide standard ones and
   allow you to customize down to the underlying openstack primitives
   if you want (we should aim for this to be only a small percentage
   of our users).
   eg. pipeline == (check-build-deploy mistral workbook +
                    basic-docker heat template + custom plan)
   here the user just choose the heat template and workbook from a list
   of options.

4) if the mistral dsl is difficult for our users to work with we should
   give the mistral devs a chance to improve it before working around
5) our users are primary developers and I don't think the current
   mistral DSL is tricky to figure out for someone that can code.
6) doing it this way we can make use of heat and mistral's horizon
   plugins and link to them from the pipeline instead of having to
   redo all of the same pages. In a similar why that heat links to
   servers/volumes etc from a running stack.

- -Angus

Some things to note:
- - the entire mistral engine can be replaced with an engine level plugin

Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/


OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>

OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140604/b944b621/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list