I don't know for sure, but I assume it is short for "OpenStack" and prefixing OpenStack policies vs. third party plugin policies for documentation purposes.
I am guilty of borrowing this from existing code examples[0]. [0] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/newton/implemented/policy-in-code.html Michael On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 8:46 AM Lance Bragstad <lbrags...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:46 PM Michael Johnson <johnso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> In Octavia I selected[0] "os_load-balancer_api:loadbalancer:post" >> which maps to the "os-<service-type>-api:<resource>:<method>" format. > > > Thanks for explaining the justification, Michael. > > I'm curious if anyone has context on the "os-" part of the format? I've seen > that pattern in a couple different projects. Does anyone know about its > origin? Was it something we converted to our policy names because of API > names/paths? > >> >> >> I selected it as it uses the service-type[1], references the API >> resource, and then the method. So it maps well to the API reference[2] >> for the service. >> >> [0] https://docs.openstack.org/octavia/latest/configuration/policy.html >> [1] https://service-types.openstack.org/ >> [2] >> https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/load-balancer/v2/index.html#create-a-load-balancer >> >> Michael >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:52 PM Tim Bell <tim.b...@cern.ch> wrote: >> > >> > So +1 >> > >> > >> > >> > Tim >> > >> > >> > >> > From: Lance Bragstad <lbrags...@gmail.com> >> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> > <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org> >> > Date: Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 20:43 >> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> > <openstack-...@lists.openstack.org>, OpenStack Operators >> > <openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org> >> > Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Consistent policy names >> > >> > >> > >> > The topic of having consistent policy names has popped up a few times this >> > week. Ultimately, if we are to move forward with this, we'll need a >> > convention. To help with that a little bit I started an etherpad [0] that >> > includes links to policy references, basic conventions *within* that >> > service, and some examples of each. I got through quite a few projects >> > this morning, but there are still a couple left. >> > >> > >> > >> > The idea is to look at what we do today and see what conventions we can >> > come up with to move towards, which should also help us determine how much >> > each convention is going to impact services (e.g. picking a convention >> > that will cause 70% of services to rename policies). >> > >> > >> > >> > Please have a look and we can discuss conventions in this thread. If we >> > come to agreement, I'll start working on some documentation in oslo.policy >> > so that it's somewhat official because starting to renaming policies. >> > >> > >> > >> > [0] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/consistent-policy-names >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > OpenStack-operators mailing list >> > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
