Zun had a similar issue of colliding on the keyword "container", and we chose to use an alternative term "appcontainer" that is not perfect but acceptable. IMHO, this kind of top-level name collision issue would be better resolved by introducing namespace per project, which is the approach adopted by AWS.
Best regards, Hongbin > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] > Sent: March-20-17 3:35 PM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][osc] What name to use for magnum > commands in osc? > > On 03/20/2017 03:08 PM, Adrian Otto wrote: > > Team, > > > > Stephen Watson has been working on an magnum feature to add magnum > commands to the openstack client by implementing a plugin: > > > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/python- > > magnumclient+osc > > > > In review of this work, a question has resurfaced, as to what the > client command name should be for magnum related commands. Naturally, > we’d like to have the name “cluster” but that word is already in use by > Senlin. > > Unfortunately, the Senlin API uses a whole bunch of generic terms as > top-level REST resources, including "cluster", "event", "action", > "profile", "policy", and "node". :( I've warned before that use of > these generic terms in OpenStack APIs without a central group > responsible for curating the API would lead to problems like this. This > is why, IMHO, we need the API working group to be ultimately > responsible for preventing this type of thing from happening. Otherwise, > there ends up being a whole bunch of duplication and same terms being > used for entirely different things. > > >Stephen opened a discussion with Dean Troyer about this, and found > that “infra” might be a suitable name and began using that, and > multiple team members are not satisfied with it. > > Yeah, not sure about "infra". That is both too generic and not an > actual "thing" that Magnum provides. > > > The name “magnum” was excluded from consideration because OSC aims > to be project name agnostic. We know that no matter what word we pick, > it’s not going to be ideal. I’ve added an agenda on our upcoming team > meeting to judge community consensus about which alternative we should > select: > > > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2017- > 03 > > -21_1600_UTC > > > > Current choices on the table are: > > > > * c_cluster (possible abbreviation alias for > container_infra_cluster) > > * coe_cluster > > * mcluster > > * infra > > > > For example, our selected name would appear in “openstack …” commands. > Such as: > > > > $ openstack c_cluster create … > > > > If you have input to share, I encourage you to reply to this thread, > or come to the team meeting so we can consider your input before the > team makes a selection. > > What is Magnum's service-types-authority service_type? > > Best, > -jay > > _______________________________________________________________________ > ___ > 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