[openstack-dev] [Heat] re: discussion about passing metadata into provider stacks as parameters
Zane Bitter
zbitter at redhat.com
Fri Jun 21 16:00:13 UTC 2013
On 21/06/13 07:49, Angus Salkeld wrote:
> On 20/06/13 22:19 -0400, cbjchen at linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
>>>> So anyway, let's get back to the topic this thread was discussing
>> about - "passing meta data into provider stacks".
>>>> It seems that we have all reached an agreement that deletepolicy and
>> updatepolicy will be passed as params, and metadata will be exposed to
>> provider templates through a function
>>>> In terms of implemetation,
>>>> MetaData:
>>>> - add a resolve method to template.py to handle
>> {'Fn::ProvidedResource': 'Metadata'}
>> I think the name needs a little thought, how about:
>> {'Fn::ResourceFacade': 'Metadata'}
It was my thought that we would handle DeletePolicy and UpdatePolicy in
the same way as Metadata:
{'Fn::ResourceFacade': 'DeletePolicy'}
{'Fn::ResourceFacade': 'UpdatePolicy'}
And, in fact, none of this should be hardcoded, so it should just work
like Fn::Select on the resource facade's template snippet.
Which actually suggests another possible syntax:
{'Fn::Select': ['DeletePolicy', {'OS::Heat::ResourceFacade'}]
but I'm persuaded that accessing these will be common enough that it's
worth sticking with the simpler Fn::ResourceFacade syntax.
cheers,
Zane.
>> -Angus
>>>> DeletePolicy/UpdatePolicy:
>>>> - add stack_resource.StackResource.compose_policy_params() -> Json
>> encoded delete and update policies
>>>> - have create_with_template update params with delete/update policies
>> composed by compose_policy_params
>> (json-parameters implementation is already in review, hope it will be
>> available soon)
>>>>>> I will start the implementation if there is no objection.
>>>>>> Liang
>>>> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list