[Pulp-list] Should we move pic to under src?

[Jeff Ortel]

On 02/14/2012 02:24 PM, Jason L Connor wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 14:35 -0500, Jay Dobies wrote:
>> For anyone who doesn't know, under playpen/webservices there's a module
>> called pic. The intention is to use it in an interactive python shell
>> (ipython) to be able to make web service calls against Pulp. It's pretty
>> handy for debugging stuff outside of the CLI.
>>
>> I was thinking we should move it somewhere in src under the pulp.com
>> package so it's included just about everywhere (clients and server). It
>> might be useful for supporting Pulp as it's, IMO, easier than wget/curl.
>> If it's packaged with the server code it's as simple as importing it and
>> using it, but it also doesn't hurt anything to just sit there if they
>> don't use it.
>>
>> Even if they don't have ipython installed we can still provide people
>> with one-liners they can run from the command line. Something like:
>>
>> $ python -c "from pulp.common import pic; pic.connect();
>> print(pic.GET('/repositories/'))"
>> (200, [])
>>
>> Anyone feel strongly one way or another?
>>
> If folks are finding it useful, I'm for including. I know that I use it
> constantly and I've gotten feed from others as well.

Agreed.  Would be nice tool for developers (users)  to use when 
integrating with our REST API.

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20120214/bf7030d6/attachment.htm>