Thanks for the clarification Subin. I'd be fine with moving the code into the Ambari repo if it makes sense to do so, but I think it would be much simpler to just use Github and pull requests for the client. It's not a big project and can easily be managed that way. I also don't want it to depend on maven or other Java ecosystem tools in order to test it. I want to remove barriers to people being able to contribute. People working on the Python client are going to be primarily Python developers that need to integrate the Ambari API, not Ambari developers, and Python developers generally kind of expect to use Python testing tools and to submit a pull-request to contribute.
As for the current Python client, it doesn't seem like anyone works on it. It's broken for some basic functionality in recent releases, and I was the only one contributing patches to fix those problems afaict. I never intended for this to be a solo project. We just needed a client that met our needs quickly, and trying to fix the current client was proving frustrating. I asked about rewriting it, but was shot down, so I finally gave up and just wrote my own. I think it's a much better client, so I released it to see if others wanted to join efforts. In the end, it doesn't matter to me all that much if it's the official client, but I'd hate for others to put their efforts into rewriting or fixing up the official client when it would make more sense to work together, IMO. So, I guess that leaves us at: 1. Does the client need to live in the Apache repos? Many open source projects leave the clients separate from the server code, and it generally makes sense to do things this way so client developers can do what makes sense for their language's ecosystem. 2. Is anyone else actually working on the Python client, or wanting to? Which approach would they prefer? Greg From: subin <subin.apa...@gmail.com<mailto:subin.apa...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "user@ambari.apache.org<mailto:user@ambari.apache.org>" <user@ambari.apache.org<mailto:user@ambari.apache.org>> Date: Thursday, December 4, 2014 3:06 AM To: "user@ambari.apache.org<mailto:user@ambari.apache.org>" <user@ambari.apache.org<mailto:user@ambari.apache.org>> Subject: Re: unofficial python client Hi Yusaku, I was referring to the Rackspace copyright in the client code. Which looks like a oversight and has been thus removed from the code. And so is not a issue anymore. I have few reservations with this solo effort by Greg.I have requested Greg to include the client into the Apache Ambari Project and also embrace the Apache way .This can help bring more people into Ambari project for example when we have changes in stacks/blueprint/REST API etc this would be good for a new contributor by giving him/her an opportunity to contribute the patches to the client code. I would have really liked The existing client to be made more bug free along with the shell but it is for the community as a whole to decide where we want to go with the client code ; do we throw away old efforts or build on it with Greg's ideas/code Do not intent to overlook Greg's efforts and will support the decision of the community . Best regards Subin On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Yusaku Sako <yus...@hortonworks.com<mailto:yus...@hortonworks.com>> wrote: Thanks Greg. > I've had some discussion with Subin about making this new client the official > one, but he had some reservations about contractual obligations requiring it > be bundled with the server (is that true? That makes no sense to me). Subin, can you clarify what you meant? Yusaku On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Greg Hill <greg.h...@rackspace.com<mailto:greg.h...@rackspace.com>> wrote: > I wrote a new Python client and published it to Github. Thought others > might be interested. > > https://github.com/jimbobhickville/python-ambariclient > > I did first attempt to work on the official client, as I'm much more in > favor of contributing over forking, but I didn't feel like the effort was > well spent. It needed a rewrite to a better foundation, and to do so > required breaking backwards compatibility. > > I've had some discussion with Subin about making this new client the > official one, but he had some reservations about contractual obligations > requiring it be bundled with the server (is that true? That makes no sense > to me). I'd rather work with the community on it than go solo, so hopefully > we can resolve things to mutual satisfaction. > > In the meantime, if anyone else is interested in contributing to this > client, please fork and submit a pull-request. Or just try it out and > submit bugs via Github. I'd like to do everything in the open, so if > there's sufficient interest, we could set up an open discussion to work > together on improving it. > > Greg -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You. -- ~Subin
