Re: Integration work

[Josh Durgin <josh.durgin@inktank.com>]

On 08/28/2012 02:15 PM, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Florian Haas <florian@hastexo.com> wrote:
>> I for my part, in the documentation space, would love for the admin
>> tools to become self-documenting. For example, I would love a "help"
>> subcommand at any level of the ceph shell, listing the supported
>> subcommands in that level. As in "ceph help", "ceph mon help", "ceph osd
>> getmap help".
>>
>> Even better, the ceph shell could support a general-purpose hook that
>> bash-completion can use (kind of like "hg" does in Mercurial), and this
>> and the above-conjectured help facility could arguably share quite a bit
>> of code.
>
> I would love to see all of that. But, a lot of the "ceph" tool
> functionality is implemented by shoveling strings in and out of the
> monitors. It largely doesn't understand what's happening.

It doesn't need to understand what's happening to give basic usage info 
though - the monitors can provide that themselves in the short term
while we don't have an admin api like you describe below.

I added a feature request for this a little while back:

http://www.tracker.newdream.net/issues/2894

> If we were to redo that from scratch, I'd convert that to have some
> sort of API to monitors, and make the cli understand all the relevant
> things. Understandably, that can feel a little bit more rigid; to add
> a command means adding it to both the server and a client, where as
> currently the client is very very generic.