fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Nikolay Markov <nmarkov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I created a little comparison table on major issues:
https://docs.google.com/a/mirantis.com/document/d/1QR7YphyfN64m-e9b5rKC_U8bMtx4zjfW943BfLTqTao/edit?usp=sharing
, feel free to comment.


On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Nikolay Markov <nmarkov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Yes, but it took almost a week for me to rewrite current API to it, and
> there are still a lot of gaps even then tests are mostly passed.
>
> For example, URL "/api/clusters/1/network_configuration/" works properly,
> but also the same handler (by Pecan design) should work with URL
> "/api/clusters/network_configuration/", and of course it fails with HTTP
> 500, because cluster_id is not passed (it is a required argument). I know
> it's simple to add another check for that, but I don't know why Pecan even
> allow cases like this and has no correct built-in routing mechanism.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
>
>> Also, is it your POC using Pecan? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99069/
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Mike Scherbakov <
>> mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Nick,
>>> if you've got a time for it - I would love to see more formal approach
>>> to the analysis. We know our requirements for Fuel already (we do,
>>> right?)), so I believe we could have a comparison table, with features we
>>> need in rows and frameworks in columns.
>>> You mentioned some of the features already, such as PATCH,
>>> application/json type without monkey-patching, etc.
>>>
>>> If we follow this way and collaboratively feel up such a table, there
>>> will be no question what to take when it comes to finally choose framework
>>> and start development.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Tomasz Napierala <
>>> tnapierala@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20 Aug 2014, at 18:14, Nikolay Markov <nmarkov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Lukasz,
>>>> >
>>>> > I did try this configuration and it was hell. I shared my experience
>>>> in previous letters in this thread. Please don't hesitate to share your
>>>> experience If you have some other thoughts.
>>>> >
>>>> > The thing is, we won't really have much time after 5.1 and before
>>>> 6.0, so all big-size decisions should be done as early as possible.
>>>>
>>>> I agree that it might be too late after release. So maybe we should
>>>> wait until after HCF - most people will have some spare time to do research
>>>> / familiarize themselves with various frameworks. What do you think about
>>>> it?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> --
>>>> Tomasz Napierala
>>>> Sr. OpenStack Engineer
>>>> tnapierala@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mike Scherbakov
>>> #mihgen
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Scherbakov
>> #mihgen
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Nick Markov
>



-- 
Best regards,
Nick Markov