[openstack-dev] [FUEL]Re-thinking Fuel Client
vkozhukalov at mirantis.com
Thu Nov 20 09:01:14 UTC 2014
I am absolutely +1 for re-designing fuel client and bringing it out of
If you ask me, it is also important to make new design following kind of
standard just to avoid re-re-designing it in the foreseeable future. Some
points here are:
0) Rename fuelclient into python-fuelclient like any other OpenStack
clients when moving it to a separate repo.
1) Use cliff as a cli library. AFAIU it is a kind of unofficial standard
for OpenStack clients for future. At least python-openstackclient uses
cliff. Correct me if I am wrong.
2) Follow common OpenStack practice for naming files and directories in a
project (shell.py, api, object, etc). I am not sure whether such a common
practice exists, but we again can follow python-openstackclient naming
3) Use oslo for auth stuff (Fuel uses keystone at the moment) and wherever
it is suitable.
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Roman Prykhodchenko <
rprikhodchenko at mirantis.com> wrote:
> Hi folks!
> I’ve made several internal discussions with Łukasz Oleś and Igor Kalnitsky
> and decided that the existing Fuel Client has to be redesigned.
> The implementation of the client we have at the moment does not seem to be
> compliant with most of the use cases people have in production and cannot
> be used as a library-wrapper for FUEL’s API.
> We’ve came of with a draft of our plan about redesigning Fuel Client which
> you can see here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuelclient-redesign
> Everyone is welcome to add their notes, suggestions basing on their needs
> and use cases.
> The next step is to create a detailed spec and put it to everyone’s review.
> - romcheg
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev