[openstack-dev] [app-catalog] [solum] Base Image tagging vs. App tagging

Christopher Aedo caedo at mirantis.com
Thu Jun 18 20:21:13 UTC 2015

This makes sense to me too, and I feel like Kevin captures the flow I
imagine for an app.  Considering the point of the app catalog is to
showcase what you can do with an OpenStack environment, if a Solum LP
can be grabbed from the catalog and results in them just needing to
add some information for they have something up an running, that would
fit the definition of "app" for me in this context.


On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:
> Good thing to discuss.
> So, if you can launch a Solum Language Pack without the user needing to do
> extra steps like creating a git repo and populating it, committing, etc,
> then yeah, I think that fits the app tag definition we came up with.
> Something a user could go into the catalog, hit launch, optionally fill out
> form, and get something running easily. The nice thing about the app tag is
> that we can selectively put it on things that it makes sense to, rather then
> just relying on the type of artefact it is. Like this use case.
> Thanks,
> Kevin
> ________________________________
> From: Keith Bray [keith.bray at RACKSPACE.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:44 PM
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [app-catalog] [solum] Base Image tagging vs. App
> tagging
> Hi folks,
> I had to leave the app-catalog IRC meeting early today, but I read back
> through the logs.   I wanted to bring up a point about Apps vs. Components,
> and determination of what is an app and tagging.  I don't think it's any
> more black and white with Solum language packs than it is with Glance
> images.
> As an example, a solum user can create a language pack called Ubuntu, LAMP,
> Wordpress, DockerRegistry, or anything else.. In fact, any Docker image in
> the public Docker Registry could become a Solum language pack .   A language
> pack can be a base run-time where the user then layers app code on-top, or
> it can be a run-time with application code already installed that the user
> just layers on changes to the app code.  Applications and application
> components can be pre-installed on solum language packs.   Solum layers on
> the controlled workflow to integrate a user's CI/CD options of choice, where
> Solum's controlled workflow instills the CI/CD gates (e.g. Tests must pass
> before we push your app live to production) and ensures proper Heat template
> selection to match appropriate reference architecture for the type of app
> being deployed.    Think of Solum as integrating Heat, Auto-scale, Git,
> Mistral, and up-leveing application deploying to the cloud such that an
> end-user just needs to specify a language pack, a git repo, and optionally a
> test command and application run command.   If a base language pack has
> everything needed to get started, it can be used standalone with an empty
> git repo or Solum could setup a git repo automatically with the base app
> code (e.g. Wordpress).
> So, I want to challenge the notion that it's a clear line for solum language
> packs to not be tagged apps and that glance images are the only artifacts in
> the gray area.
> Thanks,
> -Keith
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list