<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [Openstack] Please stop the devstack non-sense!</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Yours might make sense to be added on to devstackPY.<BR>
<BR>
We have a concept of a <I>persona (thanks! to dreamhost pep’s) </I>that might be what you want/use for this also:<BR>
<BR>
<I>Features:<BR>
</I> Supports more than one distribution<BR>
Currently RHEL 6.2 (with epel), Ubuntu 11.10 (12 WIP), Fedora 16 (WIP)<BR>
Supports dry-run mode (to see what would happen)<BR>
Supports varying installation personas (see conf/personas/devstack.sh.yaml)<BR>
A single stack.ini file that shows configuration used/applied<BR>
Supports install/uninstall/starting/stopping of OpenStack components.<BR>
In various styles (daemonizing via forking, screen, upstart)<BR>
Written in python so it matches the style of other OpenStack components.<BR>
Extensively documented distribution specifics (see conf/distros/)<BR>
Packages and pip (with versions known to work!) dependencies<BR>
Any needed distribution specific actions (ie service names...)<BR>
Follows standard software development practices (for everyones sanity).<BR>
Functions, classes, objects and more (oh my!)<BR>
Still readable by someone with limited python knowledge.<BR>
The ability to be unit-tested! <BR>
<BR>
-Josh<BR>
<BR>
On 3/20/12 11:01 AM, "Justin Santa Barbara" <<a href="justin@fathomdb.com">justin@fathomdb.com</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Hi Thomas,<BR>
<BR>
I think devstack has done a lot for the developer's use-case, but I believe we should also have a official / semi-official project that does some sort of packaging to help the production use-case. I've proposed a summit discussion: <a href="http://summit.openstack.org/sessions/view/26">http://summit.openstack.org/sessions/view/26</a><BR>
<BR>
The background: I want a semi-production deployment, but as a developer I still want to be able to edit the code (which makes packages inconvenient). devstack is orientated towards e.g. wiping the databases. <BR>
<BR>
I'm hoping that all the various OS packagers can work together, or at least tell us what sucks. As a community, we should solve these problems once, and the OpenStack project shouldn't treat them as externalities. I've been doing some initial coding here:<BR>
<a href="https://github.com/justinsb/openstack-simple-config">https://github.com/justinsb/openstack-simple-config</a><BR>
<BR>
The first use case I'm trying to solve is "single node installation of OpenStack" that is as easy as possible, but also isn't painting the user into the corner. Think "apt-get openstack", then the user finds they like it and grows to a 4 node cluster, all the way up to a 100 node cluster. So it uses KVM, FlatManager, config drive injection, Postgresql, etc. - I'm afraid it is still quite "opinionated"! I have Keystone, Glance & Nova installing. I'm using supervisord to avoid any OS dependencies/flamewars, but I would imagine that any OS packager could move it to their preferred init.d flavor easily. Swift is next on my list - I was facing the problem that the number of replicas isn't changeable, though I have a patch for that now.<BR>
<BR>
If you'd like to work together, I'd love to collaborate (and that holds for anyone doing packaging). I'm hanging out in #openstack-packaging<BR>
<BR>
Justin<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>