Open Stack

On 2014/01/01 03:35, Robert Collins wrote:
> So, we've spoken about using containers on baremetal - e.g. the lxc
> provider - in the past, and with the [righteously deserved] noise
> Docker is receiving, I think we need to have a short
> expectation-setting discussion.
>
> Previously we've said that deploying machines to deploy containers to
> deploy OpenStack was overly meta - I stand by it being strictly
> unnecessary, but since Docker seems to have gotten a really good sweet
> spot together, I think we're going to want to revisit those
> discussions.
>
> However, I think we should do so no sooner than 6 months, and probably
> more like a year out.
>
> I say 6-12 months because:
>   - Docker currently describes itself as 'not for production use'
>   - It's really an optimisation from our perspective
>   - We need to ship a production ready version of TripleO ASAP, and I
> think retooling would delay us more than it would benefit us.
>   - There are going to be some nasty bootstrapping issues - we have to
> deploy the bare metal substrate and update it in all cases anyway
>     - And I think pushing ahead with (any) container without those
> resolved is unwise
>     - because our goal as always has to be to push the necessary
> support into the rest of OpenStack, *not* as a TripleO unique
> facility.
>
> This all ties into other threads that have been raised about future
> architectures we could use: I think we want to evolve to have better
> flexability and performance, but lets get a v1 minimal but functional
> - HA, scalable, usable - version in place before we advance.
>
> -Rob

+1 especially to the last two paragraphs.

-- Jarda