RFC: Minor API change proposal for aeolus-cli

Matt Wagner matt.wagner at redhat.com
Tue Dec 13 21:58:08 UTC 2011


On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:16:47AM -0500, Mo Morsi wrote:
> Here's another question (slightly off-topic, but related). To what
> extent can we decouple the CLI from the centralized management
> services? eg. conductor, deltacloud, imagefactory, etc
> 
> I ask because it seems somewhat top-heavy to have a command line tool
> depend on several centralized web interfaces that needs to be
> configured / setup independently. Until we are able to mitigate this,
> I fear that this will always been seen as a negative aspect of
> Aeolus, as the Unix philosophy has always been
> small/independent/simple tools that do one job well.

I think Aeolus is fundamentally a collection of "top-heavy... web
interfaces that need to be configured / setup independently." It doesn't
make a ton of sense to run Image Warehouse or Conductor (for example) by
itself.

I also think that aeolus-cli is, fundamentally, just a wrapper for
Conductor's API.

I do think the idea of having a variety of individual utilities is a
good one, but I don't think that they should be shoehorned into
aeolus-cli. As you say, part of the UNIX philosophy is small,
independent tools, as opposed to one large Swiss Army knife that reaches
out to various services. We can keep aeolus-cli as the command-line that
talks to Conductor. Factory has its own CLI tool (AFAICT). Some people
have suggested in the past that it would be nifty if Deltacloud had one.

-- Matt



More information about the aeolus-devel mailing list