Open Stack

On 2014-01-30 09:28, James Slagle wrote:
> devtest, our TripleO setup, has been rapidly evolving. We've added a
> fair amount of configuration options for stuff like using actual
> baremetal, and (soon) HA deployments by default. Also, the scripts
> (which the docs are generated from) are being used for both CD and CI.
> 
> This is all great progress.
> 
> However, due to these changes,  I think that devtest no longer works
> great as a tripleo developer setup. You haven't been able to complete
> a setup following our docs for >1 week now. The patches are in review
> to fix that, and they need to be properly reviewed and I'm not saying
> they should be rushed. Just that it's another aspect of the problem of
> trying to use devtest for CI/CD and a dev setup.
> 
> I think it might be time to have a developer setup vs. devtest, which
> is more of a documented tripleo setup at this point.
> 
> In irc earlier this week (sorry if i misquoting the intent here), I
> saw mention of getting setup easier by just using a seed to deploy an
> overcloud.  I think that's a great idea.  We are all already probably
> doing it :). Why not document that in some sort of fashion?
> 
> There would be some initial trade offs, around folks not necessarily
> understanding the full devtest process. But, you don't necessarily
> need to understand all of that to hack on the upgrade story, or
> tuskar, or ironic.
> 
> These are just some additional thoughts around the process and mail I
> sent earlier this week:
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-January/025726.html
> But, I thought this warranted a broader discussion.

Another aspect I've noticed lately is that there has been discussion 
around making sure the defaults in devtest are production-ready, which 
seems to contradict both parts of the name devtest. :-)

I haven't really thought through how we would go about splitting things 
up, but I agree that it's a discussion we need to be having.

-Ben