Open Stack

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 5:22 PM Nadathur, Sundar
<sundar.nadathur at intel.com> wrote:
> The osc documentation [1] says the syntax should be 'object-1 action object-2'. Your other points are well-taken.
>
> [1] https://docs.openstack.org/python-openstackclient/latest/contributor/humaninterfaceguide.html#command-structure

For commands that involve two resources, yes.  There are only a
handful of commands with two resources (objects).

> The object itself is called a device profile, in the specs and in code.

To be honest I don't care what the specs or code call it, what is
important is what the users will know it as.  'device profile' needs a
qualifier it is too generic. 'accelerator device profile' and
'accelerator profile' mean the same thing to me if you decide that the
type of device you are referring to is an accelerator.  The only way
to stick with 'device profile' is to add an option defining the type,
similar to how the limits and quota commands work.

> > This is true, the number of people reviewing regularly on OSC outside their
> > specific project commands is small.
>
> This may be the clinching argument. Also, Sean's observation that "as it stands we have been moving [toward] the everything is a plugin side of that scale." Since we need to deliver the client by Train, and the Cyborg team doing that is also doing other activities, perhaps we should keep the timeline as the main factor.

Sean does not speak for the OSC team, that seems to be a sentiment
expressed last fall by some Nova devs.  You do what is right for your
team, I want you to have correct information to make that decision.  I
am not aware of any actual effort to remove any of the commands from
the OSC repo either now or in the forseeable future.

dt

-- 
Dean Troyer
dtroyer at gmail.com