From 199e490cbc14f6813538db41cf59820710cf0a57 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Julia Kreger Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 11:33:25 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Add vendor step placement suggestion As discussed on irc[1], we felt the need to document the stance on placement of vendor specific steps, in terms of what we as a project would prefer to do and prefer to avoid. [1]: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-ironic/%23openstack-ironic.2018-08-30.log.html#t2018-08-30T16:00:57 Change-Id: I795ac06a0c249697ed2f6d066dc46069c7e0f8ae --- doc/source/contributor/architecture.rst | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/source/contributor/architecture.rst b/doc/source/contributor/architecture.rst index 0a27435e5f..e246fd28b1 100644 --- a/doc/source/contributor/architecture.rst +++ b/doc/source/contributor/architecture.rst @@ -55,6 +55,16 @@ decorator on an interface method. For example Here the ``spacing`` argument is a period in seconds for a given periodic task. For example 'spacing=5' means every 5 seconds. +Driver-Specific Steps +--------------------- + +Drivers may have specific steps that may need to be executed or offered to a +user to execute in order to perform specific configuration tasks. + +These steps should ideally be located on the management interface to enable +consistent user experience of the hardware type. What should be avoided is +duplication of existing interfaces such as the deploy interface to enable +vendor specific cleaning or deployment steps. Message Routing ===============