Hi Yujun, Good job! This is a very important change for Vitrage.
I have a couple of questions please: 1. Why do we want to create a new datasource ‘static’ and not rename the current ‘static_physical’ datasource and change it to work with the new format? 2. How are you planning to use the old 'static_physical' datasource as a proxy if you said that you want to remove it? 3. What kind of merge is needed in the evaluator? 4. I saw the implementation of the driver.py in static, and it doesn't do anything at the moment? (if you are still working on one of the patches then please market it as -1 in the code-review that we will know that you are still working on it.) BR, Alexey From: Yujun Zhang [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 9:11 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: [ALU] [openstack-dev] [vitrage] bp:static-datasource-config-formatworking items Hi folks. I have just started working on the blueprint about static datasource config format[1]. The planned working items are as following. 1. create new datasource `static` to parse new configuration format 2. parse old configuration format in `static` with a proxy to existing `static_physical` module 3. remove `static_physical` datasource and print deprecation warning in `static` 4. merge common logic with scenario template evaluator Requesting for comments. P.S. I chose the name `static` since it is actually not limited to physical entities. Virtual entities can also be described in `static` file if there is no dynamic source. [1]: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/vitrage/+spec/static-datasource-config-format -- Yujun __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
