[openstack-dev] [Heat][Murano][TOSCA] Murano team contrib. to Heat TOSCA activities
thomas.spatzier at de.ibm.com
Tue Mar 11 08:04:34 UTC 2014
Randall Burt <randall.burt at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote on 10/03/2014 19:51:58:
> From: Randall Burt <randall.burt at RACKSPACE.COM>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Date: 10/03/2014 19:55
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat][Murano][TOSCA] Murano team
> contrib. to Heat TOSCA activities
> On Mar 10, 2014, at 1:26 PM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov
> <gokrokvertskhov at mirantis.com>
> > Hi,
> > Thomas and Zane initiated a good discussion about Murano DSL and
> TOSCA initiatives in Heat. I think will be beneficial for both teams
> to contribute into TOSCA.
> Wasn't TOSCA developing a "simplified" version in order to converge with
Right, we are currently developing a simple profile of TOSCA (basically a
subset and cleanup of the v1.0 full feature set) and a YAML rendering for
that simple profile. We are working on aligning this as best as we can with
HOT, but there will be some differences. E.g. there will be additional
elements in TOSCA YAML that are not present in HOT (at least today). We
will be able to translate the topology portion of TOSCA models into HOT via
the heat-translator that Sahdev has kicked off. Over time, I could see some
of the "advanced" features we only have in TOSCA YAML today to be adopted
by HOT, but let's see what makes sense step by step. I coul also well
imagine TOSCA YAML as a layer for a portable format above HOT that gets
bound to plain HOT and/or other constructs (Mistral, Murano ...) during
Note that TOSCA will continue to be a combination of a declarative model
(topology) and an imperative model (workflows). The imperative model is
optional, so if you don't require special flows for an application you can
just go with the declarative approach.
The imperative part could be passed to e.g. Mistral (or Murano?), i.e.
TOSCA having the concept of workflows (we call them "plans") does not
necessarily mean to pull this into Heat, but to distribute work to
different components in the orchestration program.
> > While Mirantis is working on organizational part for OASIS. I
> would like to understand what is the current view on the TOSCA and
> HOT relations.
> > It looks like TOSCA can cover all aspects of declarative
> components HOT templates and imperative workflows which can be
> covered by Murano. What do you think about that?
I'm looking forward to having you join the TOSCA work and contribute your
> Aren't workflows covered by Mistral? How would this be different
> than including mistral support in Heat?
See my comment above: I don't see the concept of flows in a model like
TOSCA require us pushing workflows into Heat, but we could "just" push one
portion (declarative model) to Heat and the other part to Mistral and find
a way that the flows can access e.g. stack information in Heat.
> > I think TOSCA format can be used a a descriptions of Applications
> and heat-translator can actually convert TOSCA descriptions to both
> HOT and Murano files which can be then used for actual Application
> deployment. Both Het and Murano workflows can coexist in
> Orchestration program and cover both declarative templates and
> imperative workflows use cases.
> > --
> > Georgy Okrokvertskhov
> > Architect,
> > OpenStack Platform Products,
> > Mirantis
> > http://www.mirantis.com
> > Tel. +1 650 963 9828
> > Mob. +1 650 996 3284
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
More information about the OpenStack-dev