Use 'applications' instead of 'services' in the environment description

[Ekaterina Chernova]

Here is the output for environment detail call. We use services to define which applications belong to the environment.

{
    "status": "ready",
    "updated": "2014-05-14T13:12:26",
    "networking": {},
    "name": "quick-env-2",
    "created": "2014-05-14T13:09:55",
    "tenant_id": "726ed856965f43cc8e565bc991fa76c3",
    "version": 1,
    "services": [
        {
            "instance": {
                "flavor": "m1.medium",
                "image": "cloud-fedora-v3",
                "name": "exgchhv6nbika2",
                "ipAddresses": [
                    "10.0.0.200"
                ],
                "?": {
                    "type": "io.murano.resources.Instance",
                    "id": "14cce9d9-aaa1-4f09-84a9-c4bb859edaff"
                }
            },
            "name": "rewt4w56",
            "?": {
                "status": "ready",
                "_26411a1861294160833743e45d0eaad9": {
                    "name": "Telnet"
                },
                "type": "io.murano.apps.linux.Telnet",
                "id": "446373ef-03b5-4925-b095-6c56568fa518"
            }
        }
    ],
    "id": "20d4a012628e4073b48490a336a8acbf"
}

Need to add fixes to use only applications word.

Yes, it would be good to change api calls from services to applications.

[Steve McLellan (sjmc7)]

Should this be 'components', not 'applications'?

[Ankur Rishi (ankur-rishi)]

I started looking into this and I'm wondering how far do we want to go?

For example, in the json returned for the environment detail call and the services detail call, we can change the API so that all instances of "services" are replaced by "applications". However, this will also require changing the same in python-muranoclient, which in turn will require changing the references in murano-dashboard, possibly down to the level of the javascript.

Also, if we change it everywhere, should we also consider changing the murano API code so that, behind the API endpoint, class names are also consistent with this change? (e.g., changing the underlying function names and class names so that they all use "Application" or "application" in place of "Service" and "service", respectively?

This would be a major change and I'm wondering about the value of doing this compared to the effort required.

Furthermore, I'm also wondering: it could be that all application packages can be considered "services". As Steve mentioned earlier, "components" could be used to describe both packages that can be considered "applications" as well as packages that might fall more into the "service" category.

Perhaps we should come to an agreement on the final choice, as it will result in the renaming of functions, URLs, classes, and filenames across all 3 components: the API endpoint, the python-muranoclient, and the murano-dashboard.

[Ankur Rishi (ankur-rishi)]

Marked as "invalid" (though "won't fix" is probably more appropriate).

As discussed in weekly meeting on June 24, 2014, we will revisit the question of "services" vs "applications" vs "components" during v2 planning for the API.