You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> on 2013/06/09 13:51:30 UTC
[DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Hi,
I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
just oss components/plugins?
I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
Cheers.
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:56 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on
> pypi
> > does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any
> api
> > commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
> > ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and
> below I
> > think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or
> maybe
> > just oss components/plugins?
> >
> > I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is
> or
> > bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
> >
> > Cheers.
>
> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
> to trouble it IMO.
>
Yes, we should do it then.
Cheers.
>
> --David
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release
> on pypi
> >>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get
> any api
> >>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
> >>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and
> below I
> >>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or
> maybe
> >>>>> just oss components/plugins?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it
> is or
> >>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
> >>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
> >>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
> >>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
> >>>> to trouble it IMO.
> >>>>
> >>>> --David
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
> >>>
> >>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
> >>> certainly a possibility:
> >>>
> >>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
> >>> on marvin.
> >>>
> >>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
> >>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
> >>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
> >>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
> >>> figured out.
> >>>
> >>> Need some time to think through this.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Prasanna.,
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------
> >>> Powered by BigRock.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
> >>
> >> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>
> >> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>
> >> --David
> >
> > Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I
> for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process
> wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
>
>
> Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
>
> Here is my thinking:
>
> I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
> abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
> of that history)
>
> Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
> vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
> mainline ACS releases.
>
> I don't envision a different mailing list.
>
> Things I don't yet have opinions on. Repo name: Should it be
> cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git or cloudstack-cli.git or something else?
>
+1 break out the repo cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
I can help extract the history out but it's not very necessary.
CloudStack cloudmonkey was completely independent of any CloudStack
component after I had implemented the API Discovery plugin which made it
more maintainable and relevant :)
Cheers.
>
> --David
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:58 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:17:16AM +0530, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:20 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I've created this repo based on Rohit's work to preserve history.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Great, thanks David. Maybe fix the repo description to "Apache
> CloudStack
> >> CLI" etc.
> >
> > Just curious about how commit rights work on this one.
> >
>
> Any CloudStack committer has commits rights to this repo as well.
>
> >>
> >>
> >> > The repo is currently read only. I'd like several reviews of this repo
> >> > before I open it up for writes.
> >> >
> >> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
> >>
> >>
> >> +1 review license, docs, any other thing that needs to be fixed.
> >>
> >
> > Will do.
> > --
>
> Mainly - I want to ensure that everyone agrees this is an accurate
> representation of whats in /tools/cli
> We can fix problems after we make it writable.
>
I've started a new thread on it as this thread could have been missed by
some contributors due to the subject.
Cheers.
>
> --David
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:17:16AM +0530, Rohit Yadav wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:20 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>> > I've created this repo based on Rohit's work to preserve history.
>> >
>> >
>> Great, thanks David. Maybe fix the repo description to "Apache CloudStack
>> CLI" etc.
>
> Just curious about how commit rights work on this one.
>
Any CloudStack committer has commits rights to this repo as well.
>>
>>
>> > The repo is currently read only. I'd like several reviews of this repo
>> > before I open it up for writes.
>> >
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
>>
>>
>> +1 review license, docs, any other thing that needs to be fixed.
>>
>
> Will do.
> --
Mainly - I want to ensure that everyone agrees this is an accurate
representation of whats in /tools/cli
We can fix problems after we make it writable.
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:17:16AM +0530, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:20 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
> > I've created this repo based on Rohit's work to preserve history.
> >
> >
> Great, thanks David. Maybe fix the repo description to "Apache CloudStack
> CLI" etc.
Just curious about how commit rights work on this one.
>
>
> > The repo is currently read only. I'd like several reviews of this repo
> > before I open it up for writes.
> >
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
>
>
> +1 review license, docs, any other thing that needs to be fixed.
>
Will do.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:20 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> I've created this repo based on Rohit's work to preserve history.
>
>
Great, thanks David. Maybe fix the repo description to "Apache CloudStack
CLI" etc.
> The repo is currently read only. I'd like several reviews of this repo
> before I open it up for writes.
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
+1 review license, docs, any other thing that needs to be fixed.
Cheers.
>
>
> --David
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:27 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <tsp@apache.org
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> >>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>> Hi,
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0
> release
> >>> on pypi
> >>> >>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't
> get
> >>> any api
> >>> >>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with
> the
> >>> >>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1
> and
> >>> below I
> >>> >>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the
> apis. Or
> >>> maybe
> >>> >>>>> just oss components/plugins?
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it
> as it
> >>> is or
> >>> >>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Cheers.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we
> break
> >>> >>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's
> own
> >>> >>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all
> of
> >>> >>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will
> continue
> >>> >>>> to trouble it IMO.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> --David
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
> >>> >>> certainly a possibility:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that
> depend
> >>> >>> on marvin.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
> >>> >>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
> >>> >>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
> >>> >>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
> >>> >>> figured out.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Need some time to think through this.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Prasanna.,
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> ------------------------
> >>> >>> Powered by BigRock.com
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --David
> >>> >
> >>> > Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I
> >>> for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process
> >>> wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
> >>>
> >>> Here is my thinking:
> >>>
> >>> I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
> >>> abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
> >>> of that history)
> >>>
> >>> Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
> >>> vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
> >>> mainline ACS releases.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hey David, let's do that. Separate versioning makes sense as
> cloudmonkey no
> >> longer really depends on CloudStack or marvin with its api discovery,
> >> though we can keep a failsafe precache or have instructions on how to
> build
> >> one using one's synced cache (which is in ~/.cloudmonkey/cache).
> >>
> >> I've separated out cloudmonkey in a separate git repo retaining its
> history
> >> using my git-fu; https://github.com/bhaisaab/cloudmonkey
> >>
> >> It's same as latest master plus some commit on adding the license file
> from
> >> CloudStack's root directory, a README.md file, a Makefile and a
> .gitignore
> >> file.
> >>
> >> Cheers.
> >>
> >
> >
> > AWESOME - thanks for the work on this.
> > I'll stand up a RO git repo clone in the next day or so for review.
> >
> > --David
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
I've created this repo based on Rohit's work to preserve history.
The repo is currently read only. I'd like several reviews of this repo
before I open it up for writes.
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git
--David
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:27 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>> Hi,
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release
>>> on pypi
>>> >>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get
>>> any api
>>> >>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
>>> >>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and
>>> below I
>>> >>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or
>>> maybe
>>> >>>>> just oss components/plugins?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it
>>> is or
>>> >>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Cheers.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
>>> >>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
>>> >>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
>>> >>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
>>> >>>> to trouble it IMO.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --David
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
>>> >>> certainly a possibility:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
>>> >>> on marvin.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
>>> >>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
>>> >>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
>>> >>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
>>> >>> figured out.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Need some time to think through this.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Prasanna.,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ------------------------
>>> >>> Powered by BigRock.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
>>> >>
>>> >> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
>>> >>
>>> >> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
>>> >>
>>> >> --David
>>> >
>>> > Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I
>>> for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process
>>> wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
>>>
>>> Here is my thinking:
>>>
>>> I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
>>> abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
>>> of that history)
>>>
>>> Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
>>> vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
>>> mainline ACS releases.
>>>
>>>
>> Hey David, let's do that. Separate versioning makes sense as cloudmonkey no
>> longer really depends on CloudStack or marvin with its api discovery,
>> though we can keep a failsafe precache or have instructions on how to build
>> one using one's synced cache (which is in ~/.cloudmonkey/cache).
>>
>> I've separated out cloudmonkey in a separate git repo retaining its history
>> using my git-fu; https://github.com/bhaisaab/cloudmonkey
>>
>> It's same as latest master plus some commit on adding the license file from
>> CloudStack's root directory, a README.md file, a Makefile and a .gitignore
>> file.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>
>
> AWESOME - thanks for the work on this.
> I'll stand up a RO git repo clone in the next day or so for review.
>
> --David
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release
>> on pypi
>> >>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get
>> any api
>> >>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
>> >>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and
>> below I
>> >>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or
>> maybe
>> >>>>> just oss components/plugins?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it
>> is or
>> >>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Cheers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
>> >>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
>> >>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
>> >>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
>> >>>> to trouble it IMO.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --David
>> >>>>
>> >>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>> >>>
>> >>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
>> >>> certainly a possibility:
>> >>>
>> >>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
>> >>> on marvin.
>> >>>
>> >>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
>> >>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
>> >>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
>> >>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
>> >>> figured out.
>> >>>
>> >>> Need some time to think through this.
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Prasanna.,
>> >>>
>> >>> ------------------------
>> >>> Powered by BigRock.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
>> >>
>> >> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
>> >>
>> >> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
>> >>
>> >> --David
>> >
>> > Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I
>> for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process
>> wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
>>
>>
>> Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
>>
>> Here is my thinking:
>>
>> I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
>> abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
>> of that history)
>>
>> Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
>> vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
>> mainline ACS releases.
>>
>>
> Hey David, let's do that. Separate versioning makes sense as cloudmonkey no
> longer really depends on CloudStack or marvin with its api discovery,
> though we can keep a failsafe precache or have instructions on how to build
> one using one's synced cache (which is in ~/.cloudmonkey/cache).
>
> I've separated out cloudmonkey in a separate git repo retaining its history
> using my git-fu; https://github.com/bhaisaab/cloudmonkey
>
> It's same as latest master plus some commit on adding the license file from
> CloudStack's root directory, a README.md file, a Makefile and a .gitignore
> file.
>
> Cheers.
>
AWESOME - thanks for the work on this.
I'll stand up a RO git repo clone in the next day or so for review.
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:08 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release
> on pypi
> >>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get
> any api
> >>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
> >>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and
> below I
> >>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or
> maybe
> >>>>> just oss components/plugins?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it
> is or
> >>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
> >>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
> >>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
> >>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
> >>>> to trouble it IMO.
> >>>>
> >>>> --David
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
> >>>
> >>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
> >>> certainly a possibility:
> >>>
> >>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
> >>> on marvin.
> >>>
> >>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
> >>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
> >>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
> >>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
> >>> figured out.
> >>>
> >>> Need some time to think through this.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Prasanna.,
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------
> >>> Powered by BigRock.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
> >>
> >> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>
> >> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
> >>
> >> --David
> >
> > Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I
> for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process
> wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
>
>
> Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
>
> Here is my thinking:
>
> I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
> abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
> of that history)
>
> Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
> vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
> mainline ACS releases.
>
>
Hey David, let's do that. Separate versioning makes sense as cloudmonkey no
longer really depends on CloudStack or marvin with its api discovery,
though we can keep a failsafe precache or have instructions on how to build
one using one's synced cache (which is in ~/.cloudmonkey/cache).
I've separated out cloudmonkey in a separate git repo retaining its history
using my git-fu; https://github.com/bhaisaab/cloudmonkey
It's same as latest master plus some commit on adding the license file from
CloudStack's root directory, a README.md file, a Makefile and a .gitignore
file.
Cheers.
> I don't envision a different mailing list.
>
> Things I don't yet have opinions on. Repo name: Should it be
> cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git or cloudstack-cli.git or something else?
>
> --David
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
>>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
>>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
>>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
>>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
>>>>> just oss components/plugins?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
>>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
>>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
>>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
>>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
>>>> to trouble it IMO.
>>>>
>>>> --David
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>>>
>>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
>>> certainly a possibility:
>>>
>>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
>>> on marvin.
>>>
>>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
>>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
>>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
>>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
>>> figured out.
>>>
>>> Need some time to think through this.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Prasanna.,
>>>
>>> ------------------------
>>> Powered by BigRock.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
>>
>> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
>>
>> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
>>
>> --David
>
> Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
Seems like it's something that we def. need to discuss on list.
Here is my thinking:
I'd move everything under tools/cli in master to a separate repo - I'd
abandon history (unless someone objects and volunteers to extract all
of that history)
Releases - they'd be separate, with separate versioning. We'd still
vote on CM releases, but likely at a much faster rate than current
mainline ACS releases.
I don't envision a different mailing list.
Things I don't yet have opinions on. Repo name: Should it be
cloudstack-cloudmonkey.git or cloudstack-cli.git or something else?
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:08, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
>>>> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
>>>> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
>>>> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
>>>> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
>>>> just oss components/plugins?
>>>>
>>>> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
>>>> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
>>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
>>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
>>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
>>> to trouble it IMO.
>>>
>>> --David
>>>
>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>>
>> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
>> certainly a possibility:
>>
>> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
>> on marvin.
>>
>> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
>> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
>> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
>> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
>> figured out.
>>
>> Need some time to think through this.
>>
>> --
>> Prasanna.,
>>
>> ------------------------
>> Powered by BigRock.com
>>
>
>
> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
>
> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
>
> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
>
> --David
Could we talk about it during the hack day and report to the list ? I for one dont understand how these break out repos would work ...process wise, release wise, ml wise etc ?
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:08:57AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>
>
> OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
Marvin only at this point.
>
> Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
Cloudmonkey has become independant of Marvin. Both can exist
independantly
>
> Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
>
> --David
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
>> > does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
>> > commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
>> > ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
>> > think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
>> > just oss components/plugins?
>> >
>> > I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
>> > bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>> >
>> > Cheers.
>>
>> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
>> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
>> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
>> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
>> to trouble it IMO.
>>
>> --David
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
>
> I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
> certainly a possibility:
>
> a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
> on marvin.
>
> b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
> cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
> cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
> apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
> figured out.
>
> Need some time to think through this.
>
> --
> Prasanna.,
>
> ------------------------
> Powered by BigRock.com
>
OK - are your concerns CM-related? or Marvin only?
Any problems I am not seeing with breaking out CloudMonkey?
Anyone else have concerns here about breaking out CloudMonkey?
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:26:43AM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
> > does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
> > commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
> > ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
> > think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
> > just oss components/plugins?
> >
> > I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
> > bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
> >
> > Cheers.
>
> Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
> CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
> lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
> CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
> to trouble it IMO.
>
> --David
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot
I haven't given breaking out the project much thought. But it's
certainly a possibility:
a) However, there are parts of the codebase (checkin tests) that depend
on marvin.
b) I need to come up with a easier way to update marvin across
cloudstack providers to enable auto-upating marvin's libraries like
cloudmonkey can. For this I've made a couple enhancements to
apidiscovery but it's not in master yet and I don't have it fully
figured out.
Need some time to think through this.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Issue with cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 on pypi
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <bh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was about to test CloudStack but the cloudmonkey-4.1.0-0 release on pypi
> does not bundle failsafe api cache so when I install it I don't get any api
> commands. The autodiscovery using sync is useful but only with the
> ApiDiscovery plugin which works only for 4.2 and later. For 4.1 and below I
> think we should, in that case, bundle the cache for all the apis. Or maybe
> just oss components/plugins?
>
> I'll wait for Chip and others to comment if we want to ship it as it is or
> bundle the cache against 4.1 release?
>
> Cheers.
Honestly - this is exactly why I've been suggesting[1] that we break
CloudMonkey (and Marvin) out of the main repo and giving it it's own
lifecycle. It's far easier/faster to iterate cloudmonkey than all of
CloudStack and tying it to the slower lifecycle of ACS will continue
to trouble it IMO.
--David
[1] http://markmail.org/message/wir5vfawex3y22ot