-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 03/20/2014 08:38 AM, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:47:20 -0400 Stephen Gallagher
> 1) We want to be able to support two initial clients of this API:
> the Cockpit management console and a local command-line tool
> (I've been tentatively calling it 'fedora-role-manage') A third,
> future option will be to also support remote access to this API
> via the OpenLMI Project.
Why do we need to separate the local and remote access in the CLI
tool? You know where I'm heading to... There's the LMIShell:
interactive Python shell-like environment allowing one to treat the
remote CIM objects as local Python objects, then there is the LMI
metacommand on top of it wrapping the direct CIM manipulations in a
human-readable form since knowing the details of the API itself is
something we simply don't want the users to bother with.
Now replace "CIM" with "D-Bus"... And at the "metacommand"
you may not even spot a difference. When you write about
discoverability, API versioning, etc., I can see so many
similarities with OpenLMI server side that I really think we don't
need a brand new CLI tool to expose this new API.
If the OpenLMI project would like to volunteer to implement this
provider and metacommand during the Fedora 21 schedule, I'd be all for
it. I was mostly assuming that the timing of things would be difficult
to manage and that we might want to hack up a simple local command for
the first pass.
I definitely see 'lmi role deploy' as a better solution (particularly
since the same syntax can be used locally or remotely) in the long
term. The provisional schedule for Fedora 21 means that the Alpha
change deadline (when all major features need to work) is July 22nd.
Are you willing to commit to being feature-complete by that date?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----