Open Stack

Alright - I've worked up the majority of what we have in this thread and
proposed a documentation patch for oslo.policy [0].

I think we're at the point where we can finish the rest of this discussion
in gerrit if folks are ok with that.

[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/606214/

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:33 PM Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 01:54:01PM -0500, Lance Bragstad wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:03 PM Harry Rybacki <hrybacki at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:57 PM Morgan Fainberg
> > > <morgan.fainberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ideally I would like to see it in the form of least specific to most
> > > specific. But more importantly in a way that there is no additional
> > > delimiters between the service type and the resource. Finally, I do not
> > > like the change of plurality depending on action type.
> > > >
> > > > I propose we consider
> > > >
> > > > <service-type>:<resource>:<action>[:<subaction>]
> > > >
> > > > Example for keystone (note, action names below are strictly examples
> I
> > > am fine with whatever form those actions take):
> > > > identity:projects:create
> > > > identity:projects:delete
> > > > identity:projects:list
> > > > identity:projects:get
> > > >
> > > > It keeps things simple and consistent when you're looking through
> > > overrides / defaults.
> > > > --Morgan
> > > +1 -- I think the ordering if `resource` comes before
> > > `action|subaction` will be more clean.
> > >
> >
>
> Great idea. This is looking better and better.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20180928/88fbaa21/attachment.html>