Open Stack

Hi cinder members,

   Eharney recently add a comment about 'resource-reset-status' command
here [1] on Dec 22, and I'd like to paste his comment here to get more
attention and discussion before the patch can go on.

     *I'd like to discuss the general design here and get input from others
before landing more reset-state commands.*
*     I get the feeling that we are just copying existing things because
they are already there, but I think we can come up with something better.*
*     (Note: I asked for more details about the CLI in the spec review, but
the only thing that showed up there was a command example that doesn't say
anything about defaults and      mirrors what existed already. So I think
we can get further into details now that there's code here.)*
*     We also need to stop defaulting these commands to "available". It's
dangerous and almost guaranteed to produce an undesirable result for
someone who runs this without          studying --help first, which is not
good design.(I know we do this in other commands. It's wrong there, too.)*
*     We could at least require input of "--state <x>" rather than having a
default here.*

I try to figure out the his concerns there:

    1. We should consider redesign the 'resource-rest-status' in the
cinderclient as we could have too many reset commands here:
       - reset-state
       - snapshot-reset-state
       - backup-reset-state
       - group-reset-state with this patch
       - group-snapshot-reset-state with this patch

      Additionly, he add a new patch [2] and try to have them covered with
a single reset command:

      (draft)cinder reset-state --type snapshot abcd-1234 --status error

    2. Stop using default value 'available' for reset-status command.

    3. The codes there just mirror what existed already (If the main point
here is about reduce duplication, I think this could be easily fixed by
another patch, and could be     ignored).

Please leave comments here or in the patches if you are interested in.

Merry Christmas
TommyLike

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/390169/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/413156/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161223/d80ee3f0/attachment.html>