Roman, I am absolutely +1 for re-designing fuel client and bringing it out of fuel-web repo.
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 model. 3) Use oslo for auth stuff (Fuel uses keystone at the moment) and wherever it is suitable. Vladimir Kozhukalov On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Roman Prykhodchenko < rprikhodche...@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@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
