On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Adam Spiers <aspi...@suse.com> wrote: > Sorry, that made me think of another newbie question - is the > intention that all actions (including user- / site- / vendor-specific > extensions) *must* be implemented in Python using the client API > modules? Or will it also be able to support extensions simply by > dropping arbitrary openstack-ACTION executables on $PATH? I like the > way git lets you do the latter, e.g. I have a bunch of shell scripts
At this point we have only talked about extending the client via cliff-derived plugins. I'm trying to decide what the value add of arbitrary binaries being called is; the way I imagine it the binary would have to duplicate the token flow auth at a minimum, why not just call it directly? git has the advantage here of keeping its state in the filesystem. What little state we have is in memory. dt -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp