Open Stack

On 2014/27/03 19:04, Jiří Stránský wrote:
> On 27.3.2014 18:21, Dougal Matthews wrote:

[snip]

>> As a side, but related note, I think we should rename the Tuskar client
>> to whatever name the Tuskar UI gets called. The client will eventually
>> have feature parity with the UI and thus will have the same naming
>> issues if it is to remain the "tuskarclient"
>>
>> Dougal
>
> It might be good to do a similar thing as Keystone does. We could keep
> python-tuskarclient focused only on Python bindings for Tuskar (but keep
> whatever CLI we already implemented there, for backwards compatibility),
> and implement CLI as a plugin to OpenStackClient. E.g. when you want to
> access Keystone v3 API features (e.g. domains resource), then
> python-keystoneclient provides only Python bindings, it no longer
> provides CLI.
>
> I think this is a nice approach because it allows the python-*client to
> stay thin for including within Python apps, and there's a common
> pluggable CLI for all projects (one top level command for the user). At
> the same time it would solve our naming problems (tuskarclient would
> stay, because it would be focused on Tuskar only) and we could reuse the
> already implemented other OpenStackClient plugins for anything on
> undercloud.
>
> We previously raised that OpenStackClient has more plugins (subcommands)
> that we need on undercloud and that could confuse users, but i'd say it
> might not be as troublesome to justify avoiding the OpenStackClient way.
> (Even if we decide that this is a big problem after all and OSC plugin
> is not enough, we should still probably aim for separating TripleO CLI
> and Tuskarclient in the future.)
>
> Jirka

+1