Open Stack

+1

How about an undocumented config?

Trev

On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 09:24 -0500, Matthew Farrellee wrote:
> i imagine this is something that can be useful in a development and 
> testing environment, especially during the transition period from direct 
> to heat. so having the ability is not unreasonable, but i wouldn't 
> expose it to users via the dashboard (maybe not even directly in the cli)
> 
> generally i want to reduce the number of parameters / questions the user 
> is asked
> 
> best,
> 
> 
> matt
> 
> On 01/30/2014 04:42 AM, Dmitry Mescheryakov wrote:
> > I agree with Andrew. I see no value in letting users select how their
> > cluster is provisioned, it will only make interface a little bit more
> > complex.
> >
> > Dmitry
> >
> >
> > 2014/1/30 Andrew Lazarev <alazarev at mirantis.com
> > <mailto:alazarev at mirantis.com>>
> >
> >     Alexander,
> >
> >     What is the purpose of exposing this to user side? Both engines must
> >     do exactly the same thing and they exist in the same time only for
> >     transition period until heat engine is stabilized. I don't see any
> >     value in proposed option.
> >
> >     Andrew.
> >
> >
> >     On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Alexander Ignatov
> >     <aignatov at mirantis.com <mailto:aignatov at mirantis.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         Today Savanna has two provisioning engines, heat and old one
> >         known as 'direct'.
> >         Users can choose which engine will be used by setting special
> >         parameter in 'savanna.conf'.
> >
> >         I have an idea to give an ability for users to define
> >         provisioning engine
> >         not only when savanna is started but when new cluster is
> >         launched. The idea is simple.
> >         We will just add new field 'provisioning_engine' to 'cluster'
> >         and 'cluster_template'
> >         objects. And profit is obvious, users can easily switch from one
> >         engine to another without
> >         restarting savanna service. Of course, this parameter can be
> >         omitted and the default value
> >         from the 'savanna.conf' will be applied.
> >
> >         Is this viable? What do you think?
> >
> >         Regards,
> >         Alexander Ignatov
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >         OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >         <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >         http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >     OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >     <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev