Code review comment for lp:~vishvananda/nova/keystone-migration

> I have a question about keystone and openstack in terms of semantics. Is
> there any value in making the terms across keystone/nova/swift consistent?
> Keystone has tenants, Nova has projects, and Swift has accounts. Gets a bit
> confusing.

If you look at the linked blueprint you will see that renaming projects to tenants is one of the later steps. I agree that naming should be consistent, but I'm trying to keep it a series of smaller patches.

>
> I understand why the following change was made, though it seems like the key
> pair bits need a new place to live. Doesn't seem ideal to call the DB directly
> here:
>
>
> 205 - key_pairs = auth_manager.AuthManager.get_key_pairs(context)
> 206 + key_pairs = db.key_pair_get_all_by_user(context.elevated(),
> 207 + context.user_id)
>

Agreeed. Key pairs don't really fit into any of the current apis we have defined. Neither do the private keys and cas used by the ec2 api and cloudpipe. We could probably move all of that into a crypto api, but that seems outside the scope of this change set. I added a todo in the code for now.

>
>
> I don't think you meant to leave this in:
>
> 305 + LOG.info(locals())

Thanks, fixed.