Hi Sam, Yes, I understand your format is：
#openstack baremetal <action> <uuid> so these can cover all 'node' operations however if we want to cover support port/chassis/driver and more ironic resources, so how about below proposal? #openstack baremetal <resource/target> <action> <uuid> The resource/target can be one item in following list: node port chassis driver ... Make sense? On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Sam Betts (sambetts) <sambe...@cisco.com> wrote: > Openstack baremetal provision provide or —provide Just doesn’t feel right > to me, it feels like I am typing more that I need to and it feels like I’m > telling it to do the same action twice. > > I would much rather see: > > Openstack baremetal provide UUID > Openstack baremetal activate UUID > Openstack baremetal delete UUID > Openstack baremetal rebuild UUID > Openstack baremetal inspect UUID > Openstack baremetal manage UUID > Openstack baremetal abort UUID > > And for power: > > Openstack baremetal boot UUID > Openstack beremetal shutdown UUID > Openstack baremetal reboot UUID > > WDYT? > > Sam > > From: "Haomeng, Wang" <wanghaom...@gmail.com> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: Tuesday, 10 November 2015 10:49 > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] [OSC] Quick poll: OpenStackClient > command for provision action > > > How about below format? > > #openstack baremetal <resource/target> <action> <uuid> > > Example: > > #openstack baremetal provision provide <UUID> > #openstack baremetal power on/off <UUID> > > I think it is easy to understand and remember:) > > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Pavlo Shchelokovskyy < > pshchelokovs...@mirantis.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> I like the last variant by Lucas, and agree we need to ensure the CLI >> interface is consistent between power and provision commands. >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:00 PM Lucas Alvares Gomes < >> lucasago...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> > It's still not 100% consistent, "power" is a noun, "provision" is a >>> verb. >>> > Not sure it matters, though, adding OSC folks so that they can weigh >>> in. >>> > >>> >>> "provision" can also be a noun [1]. But since the OSC syntax suggest >>> having a verb we could have something like: >>> >>> $ openstack baremetal set power --on | --off <UUID> >>> $ openstack baremetal set provision --provide | --active | ... <UUID> >>> >>> [1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/provision >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >> -- >> Dr. Pavlo Shchelokovskyy >> Senior Software Engineer >> Mirantis Inc >> www.mirantis.com >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
