Google Compute Engine Fog.io Integration - Utilities

Name: Google Compute Engine Fog.io Integration - Utilities
Issue Number: 6719051
Description: General utility code for Fog.io integration.

[kwal, 2012-10-19 19:20:13]

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/bin/gce.rb
File lib/fog/bin/gce.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/bin/gce.rb#newcode1
lib/fog/bin/gce.rb:1: class GCE < Fog::Bin
Fog already has a "Google" provider, with a :storage service.  Does it make
sense to add :compute to that, rather than creating an entirely new GCE
provider?

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb
File lib/fog/gce/compute.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb#newco...
lib/fog/gce/compute.rb:70: api_version = 'v1beta12'
v1beta12 has been deprecated -- we should be using v1beta13:

https://developers.google.com/compute/docs/reference/v1beta13/

[ziyadm, 2012-10-19 22:21:49]

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/bin/gce.rb
File lib/fog/bin/gce.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/bin/gce.rb#newcode1
lib/fog/bin/gce.rb:1: class GCE < Fog::Bin
Yes -- that is currently the plan (modulo any concerns from Wesley, the Fog.io
maintainer). I'm keeping them decoupled for the first pass (the Google code is
currently having some issues passing tests, and I don't want to spend time
debugging that up front). I will be sending CLs or an update once this is all
integrated into the Google provider.
On 2012/10/19 19:20:14, kwal wrote:
> Fog already has a "Google" provider, with a :storage service.  Does it make
> sense to add :compute to that, rather than creating an entirely new GCE
> provider?

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb
File lib/fog/gce/compute.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb#newco...
lib/fog/gce/compute.rb:70: api_version = 'v1beta12'
On 2012/10/19 19:20:14, kwal wrote:
> v1beta12 has been deprecated -- we should be using v1beta13:
> 
> https://developers.google.com/compute/docs/reference/v1beta13/

Done.

[Riccardo, 2012-10-23 11:04:07]

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb
File lib/fog/gce/compute.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/compute.rb#newco...
lib/fog/gce/compute.rb:13: request :list_servers
why 'servers' and not 'instances'?
Is this a fog requirement?

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/oauth/oauth_util.rb
File lib/fog/gce/oauth/oauth_util.rb (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6719051/diff/7001/lib/fog/gce/oauth/oauth_util...
lib/fog/gce/oauth/oauth_util.rb:6: # Small helper for the sample apps for
performing OAuth 2.0 flows from the
As I was suggesting yesterday on VC, it would be nice to look for ~/.gcutil_auth
first, as it contains the access_token we need. 
If that fails, then this auth is perfect.
If it succeeds, then there is a big question mark on how to manage the token
updating (which python gcelib does).