[ovirt-devel] Post: External DSL for API Specification in oVirt

[Martin Sivak]

Hi Arik,

nice article. I do agree that external DSLs are useful, but I have
(long-standing) objection to inventing new ones, especially in an area
of SDKs. I still feel we should have adopted something that is (at
least close to) industry standard - Swagger [1] or maybe Blueprint
[2]. We would get all the tooling and SDK generators "for free".
Inventing a new DSL that only we know about means we have to maintain
all the tools ourselves.

I agree with the general points though, it is very nice when the
boilerplate is inferred from the sources. It reduces overhead and the
chance of (coding) bugs.

On a side note:

The separation of the API definition jar from the rest of the engine
source code was a good move. But on the other hand, the repository
separation of the definition from the engine implementation was not so
great :( We lost atomicity and easy revert capabilities (for example
when the API definition version requires two new features, but only
one is implemented till deadline) and increased the overhead.


[1] http://swagger.io
[2] https://apiblueprint.org/

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Arik Hadas <ahadas at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Last month I attended Juan's session on the recent changes in RHV API.
> I wrote a post on how I believe it can be enhanced by using an external domain-specific language rather than the internal domain-specific language that is used today:
> http://ahadas.github.io/dsl-for-api-spec-in-ovirt/
>
> Your feedback is welcomed,
> Arik
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel