Actions :: UUID vs. Tag on command line

[John Weldon]

Sure, that makes sense.  Right now the Tag encodes a legitimate sequence.
We should probably just clean up the representation so it doesn't expose
the internals and just exposes the unit and action sequence number.


--
John Weldon

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com> wrote:

> It was my mistake to call it a hash.. it may be just a random id, in hex
> form. Alternatively, use a service-specific sequence number so it's better
> suited to humans. In the latter case, the sequence number must
> realistically reflect the sequence in which the actions are submitted to
> units, otherwise it would be confusing.
>
> On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 3:51:04 PM John Weldon <johnweldon4 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Gustavo;
>>
>> I think a hash would be good too.  I'll see what I can find in the juju
>> code base around hash representations of id's, or come up with something.
>> Any suggestions on how to generate and translate the hash are welcome too.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> --
>> John Weldon
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
>> gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The "tag" (which might be better named "internal id") looks like an
>>> implementation detail which doesn't seem right to expose. I'd suggest
>>> either giving it a proper representation that the user can understand (a
>>> sequential action number, for example), or use a hash. I'd also not use a
>>> UUID, btw, but rather just a unique hash.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 2:55:45 PM John Weldon <johnweldon4 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi;
>>>>
>>>> The current actions spec
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/document/d/14W1-QqB1pXZxyZW5QzFFoDwxxeQXBUzgj8IUkLId6cc/edit?usp=sharing>
>>>> indicates that the actions command line should return a UUID as the
>>>> identifier for an action once it's been en-queued using 'juju do <action>'.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is there a compelling reason to use UUID's to identify actions, versus
>>>> using the string representation of the Tag?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A UUID would require a command something like:
>>>>   juju status action:9e1e5aa0-5b9d-11e4-8ed6-0800200c9a66
>>>>
>>>> which maybe we could shorten to:
>>>>   juju status action:9e1e5aa0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer something like:
>>>>   juju status action:mysq/0_a_3
>>>>
>>>> which would be the string representation of the actions Tag.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is there a compelling reason to use UUID?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> John Weldon
>>>>  --
>>>> Juju-dev mailing list
>>>> Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
>>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
>>>> mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20141024/8a96fdf5/attachment-0001.html>