brooklyn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aled Sage <>
Subject Re: REST API: bundles + types + subtypes endpoints
Date Wed, 20 Sep 2017 11:38:40 GMT
Thanks Alex.

As per my comment in the PR at

Given this is a big API change and given I'm suggesting a `/v2` REST api 
then I wanted to raise it on the list as well.

I propose we split this PR into two. The `/bundles` part we can merge 
pretty quickly. However, the `/types` and `/subtypes` is too 
controversial in my opinion - it probably deserves a `/v2/` of the REST api.

We can continue detailed discussion in the PR.

I don't want to lose the word "catalog" in the REST api - it's so good 
at getting across the meaning for users! The alternative `/type` is just 
not as good, in my opinion.

The multiple endpoints of `/types` and `/subtypes` is confusing. I'd 
model the latter as just a filter on `/type`. It would be better 
achieved with an additional query parameter rather than a separate endpoint.

If designing a `/v2` REST api, we could use `/catalog` instead of 
`/type`. However, it will likely take a while to get to a stable and 
good `/v2` api. There are other cleanup/improvements we should probably 
do to the REST api if we're releasing a new version of it (e.g. exclude 
the deprecated stuff, get rid of `/locations` but figure out if we 
really need to support locations from, find out from 
the community about other inconsistencies or hard-to-understand parts of 
the api).

The meaning of `GET /subtypes/application` looks completely different 
from `GET /catalog/applications`. The latter retrieves the catalog items 
marked as `template`, but the new api returns everything that implements 
`Application`. Perhaps this is an opportunity to get rid of the "entity" 
versus "template" distinction (at least in the REST api). The original 
meaning/intent of "template" has entirely changed / been misused! I 
believe it was originally intended as a partially-complete YAML 
blueprint that someone would retrieve via the REST api, and then modify. 
They'd then POST their .yaml file to deploy their app. It has now been 
used as the list of apps to include in a "quick launch" view. If 
designing a new `/v2` api, I'd explicitly support a "quick launch" list 
and would get rid of the "template" versus "application" versus "entity" 
distinction in the REST api (anywhere you can use an entity, you can use 
an app; anywhere you need an app then a non-app entity will be 
auto-wrapped in a basic-app).



On 07/09/2017 17:26, Alex Heneveld wrote:
> Hi team-
> As mentioned earlier, I've been working on adding bundle support to 
> the REST API, so we can add/remove/query bundles.  And related to 
> this, and the type registry, is the ability to add arbitrary types but 
> until now there was no way to query those, so there are endpoints for 
> types/ and subtypes/.  This is in #810 [1].
> In brief you have:
> *GET /bundles* - list bundle summaries
> *POST /bundles* - add ZIP or BOM YAML
> *GET /bundles/com.acme/1.0* - get details on a specific bundle
> *DELETE /bundles/com.acme/1.0* - remove a bundle
> *GET /types* - list all types (optionally filter by regex or fragment)
> *GET /types/acme-entity/1.0* - get details on a specific type
> *GET /subtypes**/entity* - list all entities (optionally filter by 
> regex or fragment); same for many other categories
> A full list including arguments is shown in the PR.
> Another good thing about this besides bundle-centric management and 
> deletion in particular is that it entirely replaces the "catalog/" 
> endpoint allowing us to deprecate it.  I expect we'll keep it around 
> for a while as clients (the UI, CLI) still use it but we now have 
> equivalent methods that are better aligned to how we do things with 
> bundles.  They're also quite a bit faster so if you've gotten bored 
> waiting for catalog to load this should help (when clients are 
> updated).  And one final benefit, we can now register and explore 
> other types eg custom task types, predicates, and more.
> One thing to note is that we have fewer and simpler REST objects using 
> freeform maps where we return extended type info -- eg config on 
> entities, policies, etc, sensors and effectors on entities.  I'd like 
> to use the same pattern for returning data on adjunct instances so 
> that we can support policies, enrichers, and feeds in a consistent way 
> (removing duplication there).  This should tie in with Graeme's 
> highlights work.
> Follow-on work will see the CLI updated to allow `br bundle delete 
> com.acme:1.0` and similar.  No immediate plans to put lots of bundle 
> info into the UI as bundle devs are probably comfortable with the CLI 
> but if anyone would like that speak up.  I have updated UI to _show_ 
> the containing bundle ([2], also needs review!).
> Best
> Alex
> [1]
> [2]
> On 07/09/2017 14:58, Alex Heneveld wrote:
>> +1 to this, with Thomas's suggestion of a list instead of map and 
>> Geoff's suggestion of doing it on adjuncts.  would be nice to have an 
>> adjunct api which lets clients treat policies, enrichers, and feeds 
>> the same.
>> i can see this being useful for policies to record selected 
>> highlights of their activity so a consumer doesn't have to trawl 
>> through all activity to see what a policy has done lately.  last 
>> value is a good compromise between having some info without trying to 
>> remember everything.  sensors on adjuncts could be another way -- 
>> maybe we'd move to that in future -- but for now that seems overly 
>> complex.
>> --a
>> On 07/09/2017 14:02, Thomas Bouron wrote:
>>> Hi Graeme.
>>> Sounds very useful to me. Would be great to have this info properly
>>> formatted in the CLI and UI.
>>> As for the structure, I would suggest to avoid spaces in map keys as 
>>> best
>>> practice, so having either:
>>> [{
>>>     ...
>>>    "highlights": {
>>>      "lastConfirmation": {
>>>        "name": "Last Confirmation",
>>>        "description": "sdjnfvsdjvfdjsng",
>>>        "time": 12345689,
>>>        "taskId": 1345
>>>      },
>>>      ...
>>>    }
>>> }]
>>> or maybe even better, something like this:
>>> [{
>>>     ...
>>>    "highlights": [
>>>      {
>>>        "name": "Last Confirmation",
>>>        "description": "sdjnfvsdjvfdjsng",
>>>        "time": 12345689,
>>>        "taskId": 1345
>>>      },
>>>      ...
>>>    ]
>>> }]
>>> In terms of implementation, it would be useful to extend it to other 
>>> types
>>> of Brooklyn Object such as enrichers, etc. Although, it looks like 
>>> Geoff
>>> has already made the same comment/suggestion.
>>> Cheers
>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 at 13:30 Graeme Miller <> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> I'd like to make a change to the REST API for policies. As this is 
>>>> a REST
>>>> API change I figured it would be best to flag it on the mailing 
>>>> list first
>>>> in case anyone has any objections.
>>>> It would be useful when consuming this API to be able to find out more
>>>> information about the policy. Specifically, it would be useful to 
>>>> find out
>>>> things like last action performed, last policy violation, last
>>>> confirmation, what the triggers are etc.
>>>> To do so, I plan to amend the REST API to include 'highlights' for a
>>>> policy. Highlights are a map of a name to a tuple of information 
>>>> including
>>>> description, time and task.
>>>> Essentially this endpoint:
>>>> "GET /applications/{application}/entities/{entity}/policies"
>>>> Will now include this:
>>>> [{
>>>>     ...
>>>>    "highlights": {
>>>>      "Last Confirmation": {
>>>>        "description": "sdjnfvsdjvfdjsng",
>>>>        "time": 12345689,
>>>>        "taskId": 1345
>>>>      },
>>>>      ...
>>>>    }
>>>> }]
>>>> Please shout if you have any problems with this, otherwise I'll 
>>>> submit a PR
>>>> shortly with this change.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Graeme Miller

View raw message