Login using IBM Cloud API key about qiskit-ibm-runtime HOT 3 CLOSED

Took a look at the implementation details and see the risk to bloat or overload some of the function signatures if we stick with the plan to use the same class (IBMRuntimeService) to handle both cases in a fully transparent way.

Context

To my understanding there are different terms that end users are familiar with, i.e.

• familiar to users of http://cloud.ibm.com/ ("cloud")
  • API key
  • CRN
• familar to users of https://quantum-computing.ibm.com/ ("legacy")
  • API token
  • Authentication URL
  • Hub, Group, Project

Challenge / Risk

To map the above terms to the proposed common interface, additional overloaded terms like locator have to be introduced. This might come with an additional learning curve and/or confuse users.

cloud_service = IBMRuntimeService(auth="cloud", token=cloud_api_key, locator="crn:v1:bluemix:public:quantum-computing:us-east:...")
legacy_service = IBMRuntimeService(auth="legacy", token=legacy_api_token, locator="https://auth.quantum-computing.ibm.com") 

The same challenge will also become relevant when the save_account function is updated to serve both worlds.

# how to extend this
IBMRuntimeService.save_account(
    token: str, url: str,
    # how to design the interface to not mix and match parameters that are only relevant for legacy/cloud
    hub: Optional[str] = None,
    group: Optional[str] = None,
    project: Optional[str] = None,
)

Proposal

from abc import ABC
class IBMRuntimeService(ABC, RuntimeService):
    # implements common functionality across cloud / legacy but is not directly instantiated

class IBMCloudRuntimeService(IBMRuntimeService):
    # cloud users explicitly need to instantiate this class
    def __init__(self, api_key, crn):

class IBMLegacyRuntimeService(IBMRuntimeService):
   # legacy users explicitly need to instantiate this class
    def __init__(self, token, url):

from qiskit-ibm-runtime.

@rathishcholarajan, @jyu00 - added a few thoughts in my previous commment. Let me know what you think (or discuss on Monday). As always: I may be totally wrong with these concerns. If so, I'm happy to learn why.

from qiskit-ibm-runtime.

Discussed in during our daily sync meeting and agreed to move forward as initially planned for now (i.e. use a single IBMRuntimeService). This decision is heavily based on the assumption that the runtime APIs will be the same across Cloud/Legacy and not require users to supply different parameters (cc: @renier).

from qiskit-ibm-runtime.