Open Stack

Hi,

Top posting here to raise another complication.
James mentioned an API problem regarding the NodeRequestHandler
interface. Indeed the run_handler method should actually be part of the
generic code so that the driver's handler only implements the 'launch' method.

Unfortunately, this is another refactor where we need to move and
abstract a good chunk of the openstack handler... I worked on a first
implementation that adds new handler interfaces to address the openstack
driver needs (such as setting az when a node is reused):
  https://review.openstack.org/526325 

Well I'm not sure what's the best repartition of roles between the
handler, the node_launcher and the provider, so feedback would be
appreciated.


I also proposed a 'plugin' interface so that driver are fully contained
in their namespace, which seems like another legitimate addition to this
feature:
  https://review.openstack.org/524620


Thanks,
-Tristan


On December 2, 2017 1:30 am, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from corvus's message of 2017-12-01 16:08:00 -0800:
>> Tristan Cacqueray <tdecacqu at redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Now that the zuulv3 release is approaching, please find below a
>> > follow-up on this spec.
>> >
>> > The current code could use one more patch[0] to untangle the common
>> > config from the openstack provider specific bits. The patch often needs
>> > to be manualy rebased. Since it looks like a good addition to what
>> > has already been merged, I think we should consider it for the release.
>> >
>> > Then it seems like new drivers are listed as 'future work' on the
>> > zuul roadmap board, though they are still up for review[1].
>> > They are fairly self contained and they don't require further
>> > zuul or nodepool modification, thus they could be easily part of a
>> > future release indeed.
>> >
>> > However I think we should re-evaluate them for the release one more
>> > time since they enable using zuul without an OpenStack cloud.
>> > Anyway I remain available to do the legwork.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > -Tristan
>> >
>> > [0]: https://review.openstack.org/488384
>> > [1]: https://review.openstack.org/468624
>> 
>> I think getting the static driver in to the 3.0 release is reasonable --
>> most of the work is done, and I think it will make simple or test
>> deployments of Zuul much easier.  That can make for a better experience
>> for users trying out Zuul.
>> 
>> I'd support moving that to the 3.0 roadmap, but reserving further
>> drivers for later work.  Thanks!
> 
> +1. The static driver has come up a few times in my early experiments
> and I keep bouncing off of it.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-Infra mailing list
> OpenStack-Infra at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/attachments/20171207/a9d48baa/attachment-0001.sig>