done On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherba...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi Lukasz, > I'm not sure if anyone from Rally is subscribed to fuel-dev. I suggest to > discuss this (and any other Fuel development related questions) in > openstack-dev. > For this topic, you could use [Fuel] [Rally] in subject to attract > developers from both Fuel & Rally projects. > Can you resend it there? > > Thanks, > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Lukasz Oles <lo...@mirantis.com> wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I'm researching if we can use Rally project for some Fuel testing. >> It's part of 100-nodes blueprint[1]. >> To write some Rally scenario I used our Fuelclient "library". >> In it's current state it's really painful to use and it's not usable >> as production tool. >> >> Here is the list of the biggest issues: >> >> 1. If API returns code other than 20x it exits. Literally it calls >> sys.exit(). It should just rise Exception. >> 2. Using API Client as a Singleton. In theory we can have more than >> one connection, but all new objects will use default connection. >> 3. Can not use keystone token. It requires user and password. >> Server address and all credentials can be given via config file or >> environment variables. There is no way to set it during client >> initialization. >> >> All this issues show that library was designed only with CLI in mind. >> Especially issue nr 1. >> Now I know why ostf doesn't use fuelcient, why Rally wrote their own >> client. And I can bet that MOX team is also using their own version. >> >> I'm aware of Fuelclient refactoring blueprint[1] I reviewed it and >> gave +1 to most of the reviews. Unfortunately it focuses on CLI usage. >> Move to Cliff is very good idea, >> but for library it actually makes things worse [2] like moving data >> validation to CLI or initializing object using single dictionary >> instead of normal arguments. >> >> I think instead of focusing on CLI usage we should focus on a library >> part. To make it easier to use by other programs. After that we can >> focus on CLI. It's very important now when we are planning to support >> 100 nodes and more in future because more and more users will start >> use Fuel via API instead of UI. >> >> What do you think about this? >> >> Regards, >> >> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/refactoring-for-fuelclient >> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/117294/ >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> -- >> Łukasz Oleś >> >> -- >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> Post to : fuel-dev@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > > -- > Mike Scherbakov > #mihgen >
-- Łukasz Oleś -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev Post to : fuel-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp