Open Stack

On 13/12/13 16:20 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
>On 12 December 2013 21:59, Jaromir Coufal <jcoufal at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 2013/12/12 01:21, Robert Collins wrote:
>>>
>
>Avoiding cloud - ack.
>
>However, on instance - 'instance' is a very well defined term in Nova
>and thus OpenStack: Nova boot gets you an instance, nova delete gets
>rid of an instance, nova rebuild recreates it, etc. Instances run
>[virtual|baremetal] machines managed by a hypervisor. So
>nova-scheduler is not ever going to be confused with instance in the
>OpenStack space IMO. But it brings up a broader question, which is -
>what should we do when terms that are well defined in OpenStack - like
>Node, Instance, Flavor - are not so well defined for new users? We
>could use different terms, but that may confuse 'stackers, and will
>mean that our UI needs it's own dedicated terminology to map back to
>e.g. the manuals for Nova and Ironic. I'm inclined to suggest that as
>a principle, where there is a well defined OpenStack concept, that we
>use it, even if it is not ideal, because the consistency will be
>valuable.

I think this is a really important point. I think the consistency is a
powerful tool for teaching new users how they should expect
tripleo/tuskar to work and should lessen the learning curve, as long
they've used openstack before.

-- 
Jordan O'Mara <jomara at redhat.com>
Red Hat Engineering, Raleigh 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131213/a00432a5/attachment.pgp>