Open Stack

Hi Thomas,
Can you share some documentation of what you're doing right now with
TOSCA-compliant layer?
We would like to join to this effort.

Thanks,
Dmitry


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Thomas Spatzier <
thomas.spatzier at de.ibm.com> wrote:

> Excerpt from Zane Bitter's message on 26/03/2014 02:26:42:
>
> > From: Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com>
> > To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > Date: 26/03/2014 02:27
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano][Heat] MuranoPL questions?
> >
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Cloud administrators are usually technical guys that are capable of
> > > learning HOT and writing YAML templates. They know exact configuration
> > > of their cloud (what services are available, what is the version of
> > > OpenStack cloud is running) and generally understands how OpenStack
> > > works. They also know about software they intent to install. If such
> guy
> > > wants to install Drupal he knows exactly that he needs HOT template
> > > describing Fedora VM with Apache + PHP + MySQL + Drupal itself. It is
> > > not a problem for him to write such HOT template.
> >
> > I'm aware that TOSCA has these types of constraints, and in fact I
> > suggested to the TOSCA TC that maybe this is where we should draw the
> > line between Heat and some TOSCA-compatible service: HOT should be a
> > concrete description of exactly what you're going to get, whereas some
> > other service (in this case Murano) would act as the constraints solver.
> > e.g. something like an image name would not be hardcoded in a Murano
> > template, you have some constraints about which operating system and
> > what versions should be allowed, and it would pick one and pass it to
> > Heat. So I am interested in this approach.
>
> I can just support Zane's statements above. We are working on exactly those
> issues in the TOSCA YAML definition, so it would be ideal to just
> collaborate on this. As Zane said, there currently is a thinking that some
> TOSCA-compliant layer could be a (maybe thin) layer above Heat that
> resolves a more abstract (thus more portable) template into something
> concrete, executable. We have started developing code (early versions are
> on stackforge already) to find out the details.
>
> >
> > The worst outcome here would be to end up with something that was
> > equivalent to TOSCA but not easily translatable to the TOSCA Simple
> > Profile YAML format (currently a Working Draft). Where 'easily
> > translatable' preferably means 'by just changing some names'. I can't
> > comment on whether this is the case as things stand.
> >
>
> The TOSCA Simple Profile in YAML is a working draft at the moment, so we
> are pretty much open for any input. So let's see to get the right folks
> together and get it right. Since the Murano folks have indicated before
> that they are evaluating the option to join the OASIS TC, I am optimistic
> that we can get the streams together. Having implementation work going on
> here in this community in parallel to the standards work, and both streams
> inspiring each other, will be fun :-)
>
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140326/109ae6df/attachment.html>