Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[WIP] stdout from orchestration_stack #14389

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[WIP] stdout from orchestration_stack #14389

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jntullo
Copy link

@jntullo jntullo commented Mar 17, 2017

This PR is to generate discussion about the best way to approach returning the standard output of an orchestration stack. The method to return standard output currently does not accept any arguments, but will in the future. It returns a long string and is not a stream.

While the approach in this PR makes it into an action
POST /api/services/:id/orchestration_stacks/:id

{"action": "stdout"}

I would like to get thoughts around adding it as a kind of subcollection, so that the call could be
GET /api/services/:id/orchestration_stacks/:id/stdout
or
GET /api/orchestration_stacks/:id/stdout

While exploring the above method, it will require some changes to the way things are rendered, but logically makes more sense that it be a GET request.

@miq-bot assign @abellotti
@miq-bot add_label enhancement, api, wip

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Mar 17, 2017

Some comments on commit jntullo@f944524

spec/requests/api/services_spec.rb

  • ⚠️ - 672 - Detected allow_any_instance_of. This RSpec method is highly discouraged, please only use when absolutely necessary.

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Mar 17, 2017

Checked commit jntullo@f944524 with ruby 2.2.6, rubocop 0.47.1, and haml-lint 0.20.0
2 files checked, 1 offense detected

app/controllers/api/subcollections/orchestration_stacks.rb

@Fryguy
Copy link
Member

Fryguy commented Mar 17, 2017

Or does it make sense to treat like a virtual_column, where's it's accessed on demand?

@jntullo
Copy link
Author

jntullo commented Mar 17, 2017

@Fryguy I agree that would be best - @bzwei was hesitant about it because it will accept arguments in the future

@jntullo
Copy link
Author

jntullo commented Mar 17, 2017

thoughts @bzwei ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants