Open Stack

Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-02-02 11:19:25 -0800:
> On 2014/30/01 23:33, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > I was responding based on "Treat similar hardware configuration as
> > equal". When there is a very minor difference in hardware (eg, 1TB vs
> > 1.1TB disks), enrolling them with the same spec (1TB disk) is sufficient
> > to solve all these issues and mask the need for multiple flavors, and
> > the hardware wouldn't need to be re-enrolled.
> I disagree here, of course user can register HW as they wish, it's their 
> responsibility. But asking them to register nodes as equal (even if they 
> are close) is going to be mess and huge confusion for users. You would 
> actually ask user to enter non-real data - so that he can use our 
> deployment tool somehow. From my point of view, this is not right 
> approach and I would better see him entering correct information and us 
> working with it.
> 

I totally understand the desire to have it all make sense to users. I
wonder if the desire to have something working well in the next 30 days
should override the desire.

My thought is that early adopters are used to this sort of
work-around. "Accept this bit of weirdness, and you get all this
awesomeness". In this case "Register hardware with similar specs as
identical specs, and you will get automatic deployment over heterogeneous
hardware."

If we keep the scope narrow enough, those users only have to wait a few
more months to be able to make their hardware registrations more accurate.