12:36 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>, "Ori Liel"
<oliel(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 8:10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Engine Configuration API
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Ori Liel" <oliel(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 1:39:10 AM
> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Engine Configuration API
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ori Liel" <oliel(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 5:24:52 PM
> > Subject: [Engine-devel] Engine Configuration API
> >
> > I am adding the ability to display and update engine
> > configuration
> > parameters through the REST API.
> >
> > Working on this has raised a lot of dilemmas. The one I want to
> > focus
> > on here is:
> >
> > "Which configuration items do you think should be managed
> > through
> > the API?"
> >
> > Possible answers (you can add different ones too):
> >
> > 1) All items (the entire contents of VDC_OPTIONS, mirrored in the
> > engine enum: ConfigValues.java).
> > 2) Only the items in engine enum ConfigurationValues.java (an
> > enum
> > which IIUC was created in the past for GUI, and contains a subset
> > of
> > the items in the engine enum ConfigValues.java)
> > 3) Only the items exposed by engine-config-tool.
>
> +1
> Other values are internal and should not be exposed to the user
Who is the 'user' of an API?
The same user running engine-config
A simple field of 'internal'/'private' per variable
should be
sufficient to warn developers aka 'user' not to expose it to
end-'user'.
I am OK with that if
1) we will add such 'internal' field
2) you will have to explicitly say that you want 'internal' fields, the default
will be to skip that
> >
> > When I set out to work on this task, I was under the assumption
> > that
> > the API should show what the GUI shows (option 2). But since then
> > I've found out that the set of items in engine-config-tool isn't
> > identical to that in ConfigurationValues.java, and I've also
> > heard
> > the opinion that the API should show all values in vdc_options
> > (option 1), because the clients of the API (& SDK, & CLI) are
> > developers (as opposed to clients of GUI, which can be more
> > though
> > of as 'users').
> >
> > I'd be glad to hear some opinions about this, especially PM input
> > would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ori.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Engine-devel mailing list
> > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>