<div dir="ltr"><div>I'd say that "built using", "deployed atop" and "run atop" from the first part describes relationships between Apps and OpenStack in more specific manner than "has direct interaction" from the last one. Latter one is somewhat vague, isn't it?</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Regards,<div>Igor Marnat</div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Sun, Yih Leong <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:yih.leong.sun@intel.com" target="_blank">yih.leong.sun@intel.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I also think that the 3rd point is too wide. We should target on application that has "direct interaction" with OpenStack components.<br>
<span class=""><br>
Cloud applications in the perspective of the App Ecosystem Working Group include<br>
</span>1. applications built using OpenStack SDK’s or API’s; or<br>
2. applications deployed atop OpenStack using Heat, Murano, or 3rd party deployment/management tools (e.g. ansible, puppet, chef); or<br>
3. PaaS platform that run atop OpenStack (e.g. CloudFoundry, OpenShift, k8s)<br>
<br>
In fact, the above three can be summarized into one "generalized statement":<br>
An OpenStack application is an application, toolset or platform that has direct interaction with OpenStack services, its API or SDKs.<br>
<span class="im HOEnZb"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Christopher Aedo [mailto:<a href="mailto:doc@aedo.net">doc@aedo.net</a>]<br>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 4:14 PM<br>
To: Sterrett, Craig <<a href="mailto:craig.sterrett@intel.com">craig.sterrett@intel.com</a>><br>
Cc: Stefano Maffulli <<a href="mailto:stefano@openstack.org">stefano@openstack.org</a>>; <a href="mailto:user-committee@lists.openstack.org">user-committee@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [User-committee] [app] What is an App?<br>
<br>
</span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Sterrett, Craig <<a href="mailto:craig.sterrett@intel.com">craig.sterrett@intel.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Stefano Maffulli <<a href="mailto:stefano@openstack.org">stefano@openstack.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>> On 07/20/2016 02:21 PM, Montenegro, Patricia wrote:<br>
>>> As promised here’s the draft I propose we vote on next meeting:<br>
>><br>
>> I'm glad we're using the mailing list some more, thanks for the nudge.<br>
>><br>
>> I'm rewriting the definition using bullet points to make it more readable:<br>
>><br>
>> Cloud applications in the perspective of the App Ecosystem Working<br>
>> Group include<br>
>><br>
>> * applications built using OpenStack SDK’s or API’s; or<br>
>> * applications deployed atop OpenStack using Heat, Murano, or<br>
>> 3rd party deployment/management tools; or<br>
>><br>
>> (this includes ansible, puppet, chef, etc, correct?)<br>
>><br>
>> * applications running within containers, or PaaS solution<br>
>> atop OpenStack.<br>
>><br>
>> This is last part I am not convinced about.<br>
>><br>
>> PaaS on top of OpenStack is PaaS, traditionally has been outside of<br>
>> OpenStack scope. CloudFoundry or OpenShift or k8s or the next thing<br>
>> are<br>
>> *applications* for OpenStack, and OpenStack should serve them, not<br>
>> what runs on top of them (on top of OpenStack).<br>
>><br>
>> I fear we get the scope of this group too wide if we define<br>
>> "OpenStack Applications" as applications that run on CloudFoundry or Docker Swarm.<br>
>><br>
>> Other thoughts?<br>
> Yes to "(this includes ansible, puppet, chef, etc, correct?)"<br>
> I don't know if we can put in sample names because I don't feel like we want to promote one over the other since they are not OpenStack products, but if people think it's OK, then lets add some.<br>
><br>
> I personally feel like we need to include the 3rd bullet, for PaaS/containers, because it's such a hot topic, just look at how many of the talks in Austin were Kubernetes, Docker, etc. I don't know how much we will do, or can do to support apps on top of those solutions, but personally I feel like we need to at least mention them.<br>
><br>
<br>
Thank you Patricia and Craig for putting this together!<br>
<br>
I agree with Stefano to a degree on this. The third bullet seems too wide to me since it kind of skips an abstraction layer (at least the way I'm thinking about this). I also agree that we need to cover the containers and PaaS as well though. What about shortening it to:<br>
<br>
* PaaS and container solutions running atop OpenStack<br>
<br>
That's clearer to me, in that we're still considering the concepts of container solutions (like kubernetes) and PaaS solutions but putting the focus at that layer rather than what runs above them? Then we're still talking about the things that touch OpenStack so it's consistent with the other bullet.<br>
<br>
-Christopher<br>
<br>
> Craig Sterrett<br>
<br>
>><br>
>> /stef<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
User-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
User-committee mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:User-committee@lists.openstack.org">User-committee@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>