On 08/28/2012 10:20 PM, Josh Durgin wrote: > On 08/28/2012 02:15 PM, Tommi Virtanen wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Florian Haas <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> 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 I believe this is pretty straightforward to get done. -- João Eduardo Luís gpg key: 477C26E5 from pool.keyserver.eu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
