Copy implemented spec files to the implemented folder
Create 'newton' folder for next dev cycle as well. Change-Id: Ibb25925e991ba273301476096dffc726815c7457
This commit is contained in:
Lingxian Kong
parent
1927cfe901
commit
775b47323a
|
|
@ -22,6 +22,15 @@ Mitaka
|
|||
|
||||
specs/mitaka/approved/*
|
||||
|
||||
Newton
|
||||
------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
specs/newton/approved/*
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implemented specifications
|
||||
==========================
|
||||
|
|
@ -38,6 +47,15 @@ Mitaka
|
|||
|
||||
specs/mitaka/implemented/*
|
||||
|
||||
Newton
|
||||
------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
specs/newton/implemented/*
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Indices and tables
|
||||
==================
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
|
|||
===============================
|
||||
Allow env update on task re-run
|
||||
===============================
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/mistral-rerun-update-env
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
On rerunning (and resuming) a workflow execution, allow changes to the
|
||||
environment variables that were provided at the start of workflow execution.
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
---------
|
||||
Given the use case where a workflow execution failed because of environment
|
||||
related issue(s) (i.e. endpoint unavailable, etc.), it is possible that as
|
||||
part of resolving the environment related issue(s), the endpoint is replaced
|
||||
(i.e. different host/ip) or that the token passed as credential has expired.
|
||||
Endpoints and credentials can be passed on workflow invocation under the env
|
||||
param and then accessed by workflow tasks using the env() function. In these
|
||||
circumstances, the user will need to be able to update the env variables prior
|
||||
to re-running the workflow task(s). This also applies to workflow that are
|
||||
manually paused (i.e. for maintenance) and now resumed but the token passed as
|
||||
credential in the env has expired.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
To change environment variables, this will be a two step process. First is to
|
||||
overlay the new set of env variables to the workflow execution context so any
|
||||
new task executions will pick up the changes. Second to overlay the new set
|
||||
to the in context of the existing tasks to be rerun. Any existing tasks that
|
||||
have completed successfully will not be modified.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
- New env property for the Task API resource model to pass the new set of
|
||||
environment variables.
|
||||
|
||||
REST API impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
Update to the env is only permitted on task re-run or workflow resume.
|
||||
|
||||
For workflow resume, the PUT method of the execution controller will be
|
||||
affected. The user will pass the new set of environment variables via
|
||||
params in the Execution resource model. Then the put operation for the
|
||||
executions controller will pass the updated env to resume_workflow (i.e.
|
||||
rpc.engineclient().resume_workflow(wf_ex_id, env=env)). The
|
||||
resume_workflow method will merge the new set of env to the workflow
|
||||
execution appropriately.
|
||||
|
||||
The following is the data for the PUT request to the execution controller.
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: json
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
'state': 'RUNNING',
|
||||
'params': '{"env": {"k1": "v1"}}'
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
For task re-run, the PUT method of the task controller will be affected.
|
||||
The user will pass the new set of environment variables via the env
|
||||
property in the Task resource model. Then the put operation for the
|
||||
tasks controller will pass the updated env to rerun_workflow (i.e.
|
||||
rpc.engineclient().rerun_workflow(wf_ex_id, task_ex_id, env=env)). The
|
||||
rerun_workflow method will merge the new set of env to the workflow
|
||||
execution and the task execution appropriately.
|
||||
|
||||
The following is the data for the PUT request to the task controller.
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: json
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
'state': 'RUNNING',
|
||||
'reset': True,
|
||||
'env': '{"k1": "v1"}'
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
End user impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
- Add --env option to `mistral execution-update` to pick up a json string or
|
||||
path to a json file containing the list of variables to update.
|
||||
- Add --env option to `mistral task-rerun` to pick up a json string or
|
||||
path to a json file containing the list of variables to update.
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Deployer impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
m4dcoder
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
- Add DB API method to update env in execution.
|
||||
- Update resume_workflow in default engine.
|
||||
- Update rerun_workflow in default engine.
|
||||
- Update PUT in execution controller.
|
||||
- Update Task API resource model.
|
||||
- Update PUT in task controller.
|
||||
- Update execution-update command in mistral client.
|
||||
- Update task-rerun command in mistral client.
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
- Test that environment is updated and workflow can rerun successfully.
|
||||
- Test update of workflow execution and task execution in different states.
|
||||
Test exception cases where certain states are not allowed (i.e. SUCCESS).
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
===================================
|
||||
Support workflow sharing in Mistral
|
||||
===================================
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/mistral-workflow-resource-sharing
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
Currently, we support creating public scope resource in Mistral, a public
|
||||
resource(e.g. workflow) could be visible and used by any other tenant of the
|
||||
system. The motivation of this feature is to avoid too many 'noisy' workflows
|
||||
when you do ``mistral workflow-list`` in CLI, because you will passively see
|
||||
all the resources with 'public' property, which you don't care about and will
|
||||
never use, the situation will get worse especially in scenario of public
|
||||
cloud.
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
* As a tenant, I want to share my workflows to a specific tenant, rather than
|
||||
all other tenants in the system.
|
||||
|
||||
* As a tenant, I want to have the capability to accept or reject workflows
|
||||
shared to me.
|
||||
|
||||
* As a tenant, I can see the workflows list containing all of the following:
|
||||
all public workflows, my own workflows and the workflows that I am a member
|
||||
of.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
To solve those problems, I propose adding new resource sharing API for this
|
||||
feature, please see detailed information in the following sections.
|
||||
|
||||
Users should always use UUID for using workflow sharing feature, because using
|
||||
name will cause a lot of confusion and lead to plenty of bugs, e.g. different
|
||||
tenants could have same name workflows, they can share these workflows to
|
||||
another tenant, who will be confused when he operates with the workflow name.
|
||||
Workflow UUID in API has been supported[1] in Mistral.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
A new table is needed for this feature, the following table constructs would
|
||||
suffice ::
|
||||
|
||||
__tablename__ = 'resource_members_v2'
|
||||
__table_args__ = (
|
||||
sa.UniqueConstraint(
|
||||
'resource_identifier',
|
||||
'resource_type',
|
||||
'member_id'
|
||||
),
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
id = mb.id_column()
|
||||
resource_identifier = sa.Column(sa.String(80), nullable=False)
|
||||
resource_type = sa.Column(
|
||||
sa.String(50),
|
||||
nullable=False,
|
||||
default='workflow'
|
||||
)
|
||||
project_id = sa.Column(sa.String(80), default=security.get_project_id)
|
||||
member_id = sa.Column(sa.String(80), nullable=False)
|
||||
status = sa.Column(sa.String(20), nullable=False, default="pending")
|
||||
|
||||
Database migration is also needed.
|
||||
|
||||
REST API impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
1. Shares the workflow to a new member.
|
||||
|
||||
POST http://127.0.0.1:8989/v2/workflows/<shared-workflow-uuid>/members
|
||||
|
||||
request body::
|
||||
|
||||
{'member_id': XXX}
|
||||
|
||||
response::
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
'resource_identifier': <workflow-id>,
|
||||
'resource_type': 'workflow',
|
||||
'project_id': <ower-id>,
|
||||
'member_id': <member-id>,
|
||||
'status': 'pending'
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
2. Sets the status for a workflow member.
|
||||
|
||||
PUT http://127.0.0.1:8989/v2/workflows/<shared-workflow-uuid>/members/<member-id>
|
||||
|
||||
request body::
|
||||
|
||||
{'status': <pending/accepted/rejected>}
|
||||
|
||||
Only user with whom this workflow is shared could make this call, to
|
||||
accept or reject the sharing, or remain what the status was. Other users
|
||||
making this call may get HTTP 404 status code.
|
||||
|
||||
3. Shows workflow member details.
|
||||
|
||||
GET http://127.0.0.1:8989/v2/workflows/<shared-workflow-uuid>/members/<member-id>
|
||||
|
||||
Response body is a single workflow member entity, user must be the owner
|
||||
or a member of the workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
4. Return all members with whom the workflow has been shared.
|
||||
|
||||
GET http://127.0.0.1:8989/v2/workflows/<shared-workflow-uuid>/members
|
||||
|
||||
If a user with whom this workflow is shared makes this call, the member
|
||||
list contains only information for that user.
|
||||
If a user with whom this workflow has not been shared makes this call, the
|
||||
call returns the HTTP 404 status code.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Deletes a member from the member list of a workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
DELETE http://127.0.0.1:8989/v2/workflows/<shared-workflow-uuid>/members/<member-id>
|
||||
|
||||
Users making this call must be the owner of the workflow. Please note,
|
||||
check should be done before the member relationship is deleted, since
|
||||
after deletion, other users can not use that workflow any more, which may
|
||||
cause error to existing executions or cron-triggers.
|
||||
|
||||
End user impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Besides the new API, users can use new commands in CLI for resource sharing
|
||||
feature. For instance::
|
||||
|
||||
mistral resource-member-create --type workflow --id <workflow-id> \
|
||||
--member <member-id>
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Deployer impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
kong <anlin.kong@gmail.com>
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
* Add new db schema for resource_member.
|
||||
* Add db operations for resource members.
|
||||
* Add new API for workflow sharing.
|
||||
* Including workflows shared to user, when user query workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Tests should cover all the scenarios memtioned in use cases section.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
[1]: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-mistralclient/+spec/support-id-in-workflow-operation
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
=========================================
|
||||
Workflow UUID support in Mistral REST API
|
||||
=========================================
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/use-workflow-id-in-rest-api
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
Currently, we identify a workflow by its name, of course, the workflow name is
|
||||
unique within a tenant's scope. However, when we use 'public' workflows or we
|
||||
want to get benifits from workflow sharing feature[1], we may see more than
|
||||
one workflows with the same name (you can see a related bug which has been
|
||||
fixed here[2]). Even worse, users will never see other 'same-name' workflows
|
||||
when performing ``mistral workflow-get <name>`` command, since it always
|
||||
returns the first one.
|
||||
|
||||
Look at almost all other projects, they always use UUID as globally unique
|
||||
resource identifier, especially in the REST API, the resource name is a string
|
||||
that can be duplicated throughout the whole system, and may be changed
|
||||
frequently as the time goes by.
|
||||
|
||||
So, I propose we use UUID as the workflow global unique identifier in the REST
|
||||
API. What's more, we can consider using UUID for other resources after that.
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
* As a user, I want to see the definition of a public scope workflow, whose
|
||||
name is the same with one of my private workflows or another public
|
||||
workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
* As a user or application developer, I want to send REST API to Mistral with
|
||||
resource UUID contained, rather than resource name.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
We need to support workflow UUID as a parameter of pecan WorkflowsController
|
||||
related methods(GET, PUT, DELETE), we still support workflow name for backward
|
||||
compatibility, the magic will be happened in the db api layer. At the
|
||||
meanwhile, workflow UUID needs to be exposed to end users, using which users
|
||||
could do operations they want.
|
||||
|
||||
Things will be a little complicated for PUT method. Before, when we want to
|
||||
update a workflow definition, Mistral only accepts URL like
|
||||
http://localhost:8989/v2/workflows and the new workflow definition content as
|
||||
request body, which means workflow name is an identifier when updating
|
||||
workflow definition, and can't be changed. In order to support UUID, a new
|
||||
parameter with an appropriate default value will be added to PUT method, with
|
||||
the UUID, workflow name can be changed. In addition, when updating a workflow
|
||||
with UUID provided, only one workflow definition could be contained in request
|
||||
body.
|
||||
|
||||
Since UUID is so important right now, users should see that both via REST API
|
||||
or Mistral client, a good news is, UUID has already be supported from both
|
||||
server side and client side[3].
|
||||
|
||||
Changes should also be made for db interface, operations should be supported
|
||||
based on UUID.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
Without the UUID support in REST API, those problems mentioned in the first
|
||||
section can't be solved totally.
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
REST API impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
All the REST API requests for workflow resource will support UUID, the request
|
||||
and response body are the same with before, the only exception to this is PUT
|
||||
HTTP method.
|
||||
|
||||
When updating a workflow with UUID provided, only one workflow definition
|
||||
could be contained in request body.
|
||||
|
||||
End user impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
It's strongly recommended that users use UUID in URL of HTTP request or in the
|
||||
command line.
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
Deployer impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
kong <anlin.kong@gmail.com>
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
* Add UUID support for GET, PUT, DELETE mothod of workflow REST API.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
None
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
* Test the UUID support in REST API and/or Mistral client side.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
[1]: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/mistral-resource-sharing
|
||||
|
||||
[2]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-mistralclient/+bug/1518276
|
||||
|
||||
[3]: https://review.openstack.org/248031
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,239 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
|
||||
Include the URL of your launchpad blueprint:
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/example
|
||||
|
||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
|
||||
prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
|
||||
should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message respectively.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about the mistral-spec and blueprint process:
|
||||
|
||||
* Not all blueprints need a spec. If a new feature is straightforward enough
|
||||
that it doesn't need any design discussion, then no spec is required. It
|
||||
should be decided on IRC meeting with the whole core team.
|
||||
|
||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
|
||||
and second agree the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
||||
|
||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
|
||||
For example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes,
|
||||
|
||||
nor the exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define
|
||||
that such changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect
|
||||
upgrades.
|
||||
|
||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
|
||||
While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
|
||||
approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
|
||||
you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
||||
|
||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
|
||||
As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
|
||||
somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
|
||||
To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
|
||||
upfront.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
|
||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
|
||||
|
||||
* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
|
||||
|
||||
* The filename in the git repository should match the launchpad URL, for
|
||||
example a URL of: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/awesome-thing
|
||||
should be named awesome-thing.rst.
|
||||
|
||||
* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template. If you have
|
||||
nothing to say for a whole section, just write: None.
|
||||
|
||||
* For help with syntax, see http://sphinx-doc.org/rest.html
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this blueprint
|
||||
addressing?
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
|
||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors in each use case: Developer, End User,
|
||||
Deployer etc.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
|
||||
propose to solve this problem?
|
||||
|
||||
If this is one part of a larger effort make it clear where this piece ends. In
|
||||
other words, what's the scope of this effort?
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This doesn't
|
||||
have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that thought has
|
||||
been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider impact
|
||||
on the system. The community often has strong opinions on how the data model
|
||||
should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective. It is
|
||||
therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible on any
|
||||
proposed changes to the data model.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section include:
|
||||
|
||||
* What new database schema changes is this going to require?
|
||||
|
||||
* What database migrations will accompany this change.
|
||||
|
||||
* How will the initial set of new data objects be generated, for example if you
|
||||
need to take into account existing workflow/execution, or modify other
|
||||
existing data, please describe how that will work.
|
||||
|
||||
REST API impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Each API method which is either added or changed should have the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* Specification for the method.
|
||||
|
||||
* A description of the added or changed method.
|
||||
|
||||
* Method type (POST/PUT/GET/DELETE).
|
||||
|
||||
* Normal http response code(s).
|
||||
|
||||
* Expected error http response code(s).
|
||||
|
||||
* URL for the resource.
|
||||
|
||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url.
|
||||
|
||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
||||
by the caller and the response.
|
||||
|
||||
End user impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Aside from the API, are there other ways a user will interact with this
|
||||
feature?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-mistralclient? What does the user
|
||||
interface there look like?
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example
|
||||
how often will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling
|
||||
pattern of existing code.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A small change in a utility function or a commonly used decorator can have a
|
||||
large impacts on performance.
|
||||
|
||||
* Calls which result in a database queries can have a profound impact on
|
||||
performance when called in critical sections of the code.
|
||||
|
||||
* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there
|
||||
on holding the lock?
|
||||
|
||||
Deployer impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure OpenStack
|
||||
that have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* What config options are being added? Are the default values ones which will
|
||||
work well in real deployments?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
|
||||
* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
|
||||
|
||||
* Please state anything that those doing continuous deployment, or those
|
||||
upgrading from the previous release, need to be aware of. Also describe
|
||||
any plans to deprecate configuration values or features.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
|
||||
throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
|
||||
|
||||
If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
|
||||
primary author and contact.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Other contributors:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
|
||||
done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
|
||||
but we're mostly trying to understand the timeline for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
* Include specific references to specs and/or blueprints in mistral, or in
|
||||
other projects, that this one either depends on or is related to.
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
|
||||
included in Mistral? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
|
||||
specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss how the change will be tested, e.g. how Mistral is deployed?
|
||||
Does this change need some specific config options? Does this change need
|
||||
some 3rd party services pre-installed?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
||||
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
||||
references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to notes from a summit session
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,239 @@
|
|||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License.
|
||||
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
|
||||
==========================================
|
||||
|
||||
Include the URL of your launchpad blueprint:
|
||||
|
||||
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/example
|
||||
|
||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
|
||||
prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
|
||||
should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message respectively.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about the mistral-spec and blueprint process:
|
||||
|
||||
* Not all blueprints need a spec. If a new feature is straightforward enough
|
||||
that it doesn't need any design discussion, then no spec is required. It
|
||||
should be decided on IRC meeting with the whole core team.
|
||||
|
||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
|
||||
and second agree the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
||||
|
||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
|
||||
For example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes,
|
||||
|
||||
nor the exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define
|
||||
that such changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect
|
||||
upgrades.
|
||||
|
||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
|
||||
While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
|
||||
approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
|
||||
you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
||||
|
||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
|
||||
As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
|
||||
somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
|
||||
To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
|
||||
upfront.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
|
||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
|
||||
|
||||
* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
|
||||
|
||||
* The filename in the git repository should match the launchpad URL, for
|
||||
example a URL of: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/awesome-thing
|
||||
should be named awesome-thing.rst.
|
||||
|
||||
* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template. If you have
|
||||
nothing to say for a whole section, just write: None.
|
||||
|
||||
* For help with syntax, see http://sphinx-doc.org/rest.html
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this blueprint
|
||||
addressing?
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
---------
|
||||
|
||||
What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
|
||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors in each use case: Developer, End User,
|
||||
Deployer etc.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
|
||||
propose to solve this problem?
|
||||
|
||||
If this is one part of a larger effort make it clear where this piece ends. In
|
||||
other words, what's the scope of this effort?
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
------------
|
||||
|
||||
What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This doesn't
|
||||
have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that thought has
|
||||
been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
-----------------
|
||||
|
||||
Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider impact
|
||||
on the system. The community often has strong opinions on how the data model
|
||||
should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective. It is
|
||||
therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible on any
|
||||
proposed changes to the data model.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section include:
|
||||
|
||||
* What new database schema changes is this going to require?
|
||||
|
||||
* What database migrations will accompany this change.
|
||||
|
||||
* How will the initial set of new data objects be generated, for example if you
|
||||
need to take into account existing workflow/execution, or modify other
|
||||
existing data, please describe how that will work.
|
||||
|
||||
REST API impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Each API method which is either added or changed should have the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* Specification for the method.
|
||||
|
||||
* A description of the added or changed method.
|
||||
|
||||
* Method type (POST/PUT/GET/DELETE).
|
||||
|
||||
* Normal http response code(s).
|
||||
|
||||
* Expected error http response code(s).
|
||||
|
||||
* URL for the resource.
|
||||
|
||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url.
|
||||
|
||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
||||
by the caller and the response.
|
||||
|
||||
End user impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Aside from the API, are there other ways a user will interact with this
|
||||
feature?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-mistralclient? What does the user
|
||||
interface there look like?
|
||||
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example
|
||||
how often will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling
|
||||
pattern of existing code.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A small change in a utility function or a commonly used decorator can have a
|
||||
large impacts on performance.
|
||||
|
||||
* Calls which result in a database queries can have a profound impact on
|
||||
performance when called in critical sections of the code.
|
||||
|
||||
* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there
|
||||
on holding the lock?
|
||||
|
||||
Deployer impact
|
||||
---------------
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure OpenStack
|
||||
that have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* What config options are being added? Are the default values ones which will
|
||||
work well in real deployments?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
|
||||
* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
|
||||
|
||||
* Please state anything that those doing continuous deployment, or those
|
||||
upgrading from the previous release, need to be aware of. Also describe
|
||||
any plans to deprecate configuration values or features.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
-----------
|
||||
|
||||
Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
|
||||
throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
|
||||
|
||||
If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
|
||||
primary author and contact.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Other contributors:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
|
||||
done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
|
||||
but we're mostly trying to understand the timeline for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
* Include specific references to specs and/or blueprints in mistral, or in
|
||||
other projects, that this one either depends on or is related to.
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
|
||||
included in Mistral? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
|
||||
specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss how the change will be tested, e.g. how Mistral is deployed?
|
||||
Does this change need some specific config options? Does this change need
|
||||
some 3rd party services pre-installed?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
||||
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
||||
references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to notes from a summit session
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue