Open Stack

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/24/2014 03:19 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> On 24 September 2014 16:38, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/23/2014 10:29 PM, Steven Dake wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is a deployment program - tripleo is just one implementation.
>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, that is not correct. Like it or not (I personally don't), Triple-O
>>> is
>>> *the* Deployment Program for OpenStack:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/programs.yaml#n284
>>>
>>> Saying Triple-O is just one implementation of a deployment program is
>>> like
>>> saying Heat is just one implementation of an orchestration program. It
>>> isn't. It's *the* implemenation of an orchestration program that has been
>>> blessed by the TC:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/programs.yaml#n112
>>
>>
>> Thats not what Steve said. He said that the codebase they are creating
>> is a *project* with a target home of the OpenStack Deployment
>> *program*, aka TripleO. The TC blesses social structure and code
>> separately: no part of TripleO has had its code blessed by the TC yet
>> (incubation/graduation), but the team was blessed.
>
>
> There are zero programs in the OpenStack governance repository that have
> competing implementations for the same thing.
>
> Like it or not, the TC process of blessing these "teams" has effectively
> blessed a single implementation of something.

And it looks to me like what's being proposed here is that there is a
group of folks who intend to work on Knoll, and they are indicating
that they plan to participate and would like to be a part of that
"team". Personally, as a TripleO "team" member, I welcome that
approach and their willingness to participate and share experience
with the Deployment program.

Meaning: exactly what you seem to claim is not possible due to some
perceived blessing, is indeed in fact happening, or trying to come
about.

It would be great if Heat was already perfect and great at doing
container orchestration *really* well. I'm not saying Kubernetes is
either, but I'm not going to dismiss it just b/c it might "compete"
with Heat. I see lots of other integration points with OpenStack
services  (using heat/nova/ironic to deploy kubernetes host, still
using ironic to deploy baremetal storage nodes due to the iscsi issue,
etc).


>
> -jay
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
-- James Slagle
--