Open Stack

On 20 August 2014 02:37, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
...

>> I'd like to see more unification of implementations in TripleO - but I
>> still believe our basic principle of using OpenStack technologies that
>> already exist in preference to third party ones is still sound, and
>> offers substantial dogfood and virtuous circle benefits.
>
>
> No doubt Triple-O serves a valuable dogfood and virtuous cycle purpose.
> However, I would move that the Deployment Program should welcome the many
> projects currently in the stackforge/ code namespace that do deployment of
> OpenStack using traditional configuration management tools like Chef,
> Puppet, and Ansible. It cannot be argued that these configuration management
> systems are the de-facto way that OpenStack is deployed outside of HP, and
> they belong in the Deployment Program, IMO.

I think you mean it 'can be argued'... ;). And I'd be happy if folk in
those communities want to join in the deployment program and have code
repositories in openstack/. To date, none have asked.

> As a TC member, I would welcome someone from the Chef community proposing
> the Chef cookbooks for inclusion in the Deployment program, to live under
> the openstack/ code namespace. Same for the Puppet modules.

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud