[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       vdsm-devel
Subject:    [vdsm] vdsm API schema
From:       iheim () redhat ! com (Itamar Heim)
Date:       2012-10-23 5:51:14
Message-ID: 50863052.3000305 () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 10/22/2012 09:25 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 08:56:16PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote:
>> On 10/22/2012 03:04 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 09:09:52AM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/2012 03:12 AM, Adam Litke wrote:
>>>>> For the past few weeks I have been working on creating a schema that fully
>>>>> describes the vdsm API.  I am mostly finished with that effort and I wanted to
>>>>> share the results with the team.  Attached are two files: the raw schema and an
>>>>> html document with cross-linked type information.
>>>>>
>>>>> This should already be useful in its current form, but I have bigger plans.  I
>>>>> would first like to get help to correct errors in the schema.  Then, I will
>>>>> start the process of writing a code generator that will create C/gObject code
>>>>> that we can compile into a libvdsm with language bindings for python, java, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please take a look at the attached files and let me know what you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S.  I tried to attach these to the oVirt Wiki, but they are not permitted file
>>>>> types.
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>
>>>> that's quite a big scheme to review.
>>>> have you thought about ways to solicit inputs for it?
>>>> (maybe schedule per topic reviews of the new scheme/api for VM
>>>> operations (virt), network (host level, vm level), storage, sla
>>>> policy, etc.)?
>>>
>>> For the first pass, we are trying to replicate the current API as much as
>>> possible.  For subsequent refactoring, I'd expect the discussions to occur in
>>> the community around the patches that are implementing the proposed changes.
>>>
>>
>> I think it would be worth highlighting these patches on mailing
>> list, or even do a scheduled discussion/brainstorm around various
>> parts for where it should go.
>
> I have been trying to get some attention on it for some time.  I agree it's a
> good idea.  I'll be presenting it at the Barcelona workshop as well.  Any other
> ideas on how to have a constructive and inclusive mailing list discussion would
> be welcomed :)  In the past, it was hard to keep the thread focused and
> driving toward consensus.
>

I'd try to focus on one area at time, do an email thread as a prep for a 
meeting to drive more consolidated discussions, then see where you reach.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]