Bug 1371239 - Docs: [REST API] - Client is stating that the use of Instance Types is supposed to be part of 4.0 and is looking for documentation as to how to use.
Summary: Docs: [REST API] - Client is stating that the use of Instance Types is suppos...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Documentation
Version: 4.0.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Linux
high
medium
Target Milestone: ovirt-4.0.7
: ---
Assignee: rhev-docs@redhat.com
QA Contact: rhev-docs@redhat.com
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1148393
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-08-29 16:58 UTC by Jason
Modified: 2020-06-11 12:58 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-05-24 14:57:58 UTC
oVirt Team: Docs
Target Upstream Version:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Jason 2016-08-29 16:58:03 UTC 
Further information from client:

Instance Types are part of the new model of templating according to oVirt

http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/virt/instance-types/

"Enhancing oVirt template model to allow for more flexible options in
creating virtual machines targeted at improving self service for the
private cloud use cases."
Comment 1 Robert McSwain 2016-11-14 15:43:21 UTC 
Any updates here?
Comment 2 Yaniv Lavi 2016-11-15 10:03:32 UTC 
(In reply to Robert McSwain from comment #1)
> Any updates here?

We are planning to add this in a coming docs sprint of the API docs.
Comment 4 Lucy Bopf 2017-01-31 08:14:46 UTC 
Jason, Robert,

Some information about Instance Types has been added to the new 4.0 REST API Guide, though it is yet to be reviewed by the documentation team:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-virtualization/4.0/single/rest-api-guide/#services-instance_type

Please let me know if you feel that any detail is missing.

Moving this bug to ON_QA while the content is pending docs review.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.