Open Stack

Hi James, thanks for the corrections/explanations. A comment inline (and 
a further question) :)

On 09/26/2014 05:35 PM, James Slagle wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Heh, I just got off the phone with Monty talking about this :) Comments
>> inline...
>>
>> On 09/22/2014 03:11 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
>>>
>>> The quality designation is really important for the operator
>>> community who are trying to work out what we can give to our end
>>> users.
>>
>>
>> So, I think it's important to point out here that there are three different
>> kinds of operators/deployers:
>>
>>   * Ones who use a distribution of OpenStack (RDO, UCA, MOS, Nebula, Piston,
>> etc)
>>   * Ones who use Triple-O
>>   * Ones who go it alone and install (via source, a mixture of source and
>> packages, via config management like Chef or Puppet, etc)
>
> I'm not sure TripleO fits in this list. It is not just a collection of
> prescriptive OpenStack bits used to do a deployment. TripleO is
> tooling to build OpenStack to deploy OpenStack. You can use whatever
> "source" (packages, distribution, released tarballs, straight from
> git) you want to build that OpenStack. TripleO could deploy your first
> or third bullet item.

OK, fair point, thanks for that added bit of description.

>> In reality, you are referring to the last group, since operators in the
>> first group are saying "we are relying on a distribution to make informed
>> choices about what is ready for prime time because we tested these things
>> together". Operators in the second group are really only HP right now,
>> AFAICT, and Triple-O's "opinion" on the production readiness of the things
>> it deploys in the undercloud are roughly equal to "all of the integrated
>> release that the TC defines".
>
> FWIW, TripleO offers deploying using distributions, by installing from
> packages from the RDO repositories. There's nothing RDO specific about
> it though, any packaged OpenStack distribution could be installed with
> the TripleO tooling. RDO is just likely the most well tested.

Oh, good to know. Sorry, my information about Triple-O's undercloud 
setup is clearly outdated. I thought that the undercloud was build from 
source repositories devstack-style. Thanks for hitting me with a 
cluestick. :)

> Even when not installing via a distribution, and either directly from
> trunk or the integrated release tarballs, I don't know that any
> TripleO opinion enters into it. TripleO uses the integrated projects
> of OpenStack to deploy an overcloud. In an overcloud, you may see
> support for some incubated projects, depending on if there's interest
> from the community for that support.

OK, interesting. So, in summary, Triple-O really doesn't offer much of a 
"this is production-ready" stamp to anything based on whether it deploys 
a project or not. So, operators who deploy with Triple-O would be in the 
"you're on your own" camp from the bulleted list above. Would that be a 
fair statement?

Best,
-jay