From dev-return-2387-apmail-openwhisk-dev-archive=openwhisk.apache.org@openwhisk.apache.org Sat Aug 11 01:21:02 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-openwhisk-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-openwhisk-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EF7B18F7D for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 01:21:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6177 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2018 01:21:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openwhisk-dev-archive@openwhisk.apache.org Received: (qmail 6126 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2018 01:21:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openwhisk.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@openwhisk.apache.org Received: (qmail 6114 invoked by uid 99); 11 Aug 2018 01:21:01 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 01:21:01 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 01CD4C19BA for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 01:21:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.131 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.131 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wj5_97sPzgT4 for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 01:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f169.google.com (mail-qt0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 665EF5F35A for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 01:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f169.google.com with SMTP id b15-v6so12179212qtp.11 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 18:20:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date:subject:message-id :references:in-reply-to:to; bh=QEeSQXqLsEZUbl5/fhbR69eh6zKV7na8L9+adfZ7FrY=; b=gd6SE3vam2lqJ7EnHKNn2yug0JxgPHgGFLoWdCifTddN8R/abLELJYPBGIsTATz7MJ Idvn3xYbxmNrE9OgOOVKV8q453JwZ/4ODywNzX0uj+QUG8AyyVv+yA8yhZlKmeCCu75W yy+IMmkST7UeZFSCLMas/oN3MEBme2yQWXVBsECiE3ca6UhE/GuI4Tb8iyyYAvuzdMsH y8LwNwwfuHe9vkeUqjcAYUg5rRRc73wP6WtX91pUeFaJNyC5Gj1sKtg+2sfPnnS4/E/z oKd4npe9Pjw8dDAi5EsdWA56HI6sfmHoBKJB7IPDyKavrJ3X3YrT9e8ShrlRsopJO/C9 zPpQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date :subject:message-id:references:in-reply-to:to; bh=QEeSQXqLsEZUbl5/fhbR69eh6zKV7na8L9+adfZ7FrY=; b=e52xtrpd/O3jYWpxEvDzwpfvOOYHKmrH3ljyWTeJHoTOrf6/blexwA+Al18KQRXt1A bx4IAdmc/FBD5s0V1Y0rgH+QFFSOZcuWsNsRtyDgJALkk9+97KekyHpnspOhkJtYJBtw OfWnXF3+/nH6ndZJ0HN5QC7szuMrMDTwro2p6View2js35txdwf4zW93mGWVqdAOX5FT jruB7iYVwG78B7HOlmPFS5HZUu5FVXvli5RrwaNQO03yIhSWFZDe9JP/8R/NZ5rBjj28 dmL6gTYuqI7d6S74BB4itF1BnwwDEq1sgjbseB7hneAeBYCVQxG1lPyRVetdG/iuSdpK pSsw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlH6gsCobGM67CTFZq+24N8jBCfcSsTH15bMPKkhQ4ixltv+h4yg vEl06dD6BTvfa4H8AojoYDl5+QGv X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPxjsHsTvWVlzRMwreJqw4RrFv0jP8X/KpiynRSpvRE/L8yR4gCdqQNG6kvxx5OJYVohNYA1Dw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2aeb:: with SMTP id c40-v6mr8615095qta.374.1533950457898; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 18:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (ool-457ea8b1.dyn.optonline.net. [69.126.168.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e29-v6sm162752qte.47.2018.08.10.18.20.57 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 18:20:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Rodric Rabbah Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 21:20:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Pluggable API Gateways Message-Id: References: <65ED8476-C019-4449-AC9A-8ECBD1F14163@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15G77) What about subdirectories instead of repos? I admit not having thought too d= eeply about this yet but I find that we have too many repos and generally ma= kes things harder to work across many components. =20 -r > On Aug 10, 2018, at 9:17 PM, japhar81 wrote: >=20 > As I started poking at incubator-openwhisk-apigateway, it may be preferabl= e > to make this a repo that just holds documentation and ansible scripts, and= > each apigateway is a submodule. For instance the current gateway would mov= e > to incubator-openwhisk-apigateway-openresty or something along those lines= . > Then we could add incubator-openwhisk-apigateway-traefik, etc. This would > mean easier maintenance, simpler travis configs, etc. I see lots of upside= > and no real downside. Obviously I don't have rights to do this myself, but= > Id be curious if you folks agree, and if someone with enough github rights= > might be willing to help me get it done.. >=20 >> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 8:24 PM japhar81 wrote: >>=20 >> I completely agree, it's model is a bit rigid -- I'm happy to take on tha= t >> work as well, though it might take me a bit, I've just started playing wi= th >> golang. Regardless, I do think it should come as a follow-on effort, with= >> the current model being the first plugin we build -- which will >> coincidentally work against at least the current gateway and the traefik >> one I'm trying to implement. >>=20 >>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 8:21 PM Rodric Rabbah wrote: >>>=20 >>> My point about the cli is that current implementation is unnecessarily >>> opinionated and while you can work with it, it=E2=80=99s just not necess= ary to have >>> to fit into its current model. I opened several issues to try to address= >>> these shortcomings. It is absolutely true that this can be viewed >>> separately from consolidating the route management package with its >>> gateway. >>>=20 >>> -r >>=20 >>=20