All,
Recently we launched a couple new Fuel related projects
(fuel_plugin_builder, fuel_agent, fuel_upgrade, etc.). Those projects are
written in python and they use different approaches to organizing CLI,
configuration, different third party libraries, etc. Besides, we have some
old Fuel projects
I have another example, nailgun and UI are bundled in FuelWeb being quite
independent components. Nailgun is python REST API, while UI is HTML/CSS/JS
+ libs. I also support the idea making CLI a separate project, it is
similar to FuelWeb UI, it uses the same REST API. Fuelclient lib is also
good id
>
> Let's do the same for Fuel. Frankly, I'd say we could take OpenStack
> standards as is and use them for Fuel. But maybe there are other opinions.
> Let's discuss this and decide what to do. Do we actually need those
> standards at all?
>
> Agree that we can take openstack standarts as example,
Could we specify that all Fuel configuration files should include all
allowable
parameters. The optional parameters can be commented out but being able
to uncomment and populate a parameter is a lot easier than having to find
the
exact name and order.
For bonus points, we could include commentary
