Open Stack

Zun had a similar issue of colliding on the keyword "container", and we chose to use an alternative term "appcontainer" that is not perfect but acceptable. IMHO, this kind of top-level name collision issue would be better resolved by introducing namespace per project, which is the approach adopted by AWS.

Best regards,
Hongbin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypipes at gmail.com]
> Sent: March-20-17 3:35 PM
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][osc] What name to use for magnum
> commands in osc?
> 
> On 03/20/2017 03:08 PM, Adrian Otto wrote:
> > Team,
> >
> > Stephen Watson has been working on an magnum feature to add magnum
> commands to the openstack client by implementing a plugin:
> >
> >
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/python-
> > magnumclient+osc
> >
> > In review of this work, a question has resurfaced, as to what the
> client command name should be for magnum related commands. Naturally,
> we’d like to have the name “cluster” but that word is already in use by
> Senlin.
> 
> Unfortunately, the Senlin API uses a whole bunch of generic terms as
> top-level REST resources, including "cluster", "event", "action",
> "profile", "policy", and "node". :( I've warned before that use of
> these generic terms in OpenStack APIs without a central group
> responsible for curating the API would lead to problems like this. This
> is why, IMHO, we need the API working group to be ultimately
> responsible for preventing this type of thing from happening. Otherwise,
> there ends up being a whole bunch of duplication and same terms being
> used for entirely different things.
> 
>  >Stephen opened a discussion with Dean Troyer about this, and found
> that “infra” might be a suitable name and began using that, and
> multiple team members are not satisfied with it.
> 
> Yeah, not sure about "infra". That is both too generic and not an
> actual "thing" that Magnum provides.
> 
>  > The name “magnum” was excluded from consideration because OSC aims
> to be project name agnostic. We know that no matter what word we pick,
> it’s not going to be ideal. I’ve added an agenda on our upcoming team
> meeting to judge community consensus about which alternative we should
> select:
> >
> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2017-
> 03
> > -21_1600_UTC
> >
> > Current choices on the table are:
> >
> >   * c_cluster (possible abbreviation alias for
> container_infra_cluster)
> >   * coe_cluster
> >   * mcluster
> >   * infra
> >
> > For example, our selected name would appear in “openstack …” commands.
> Such as:
> >
> > $ openstack c_cluster create …
> >
> > If you have input to share, I encourage you to reply to this thread,
> or come to the team meeting so we can consider your input before the
> team makes a selection.
> 
> What is Magnum's service-types-authority service_type?
> 
> Best,
> -jay
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-
> request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev