[openstack-dev] [chef] Making the Kitchen Great Again: A Retrospective on OpenStack & Chef
Fox, Kevin M
Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov
Thu Feb 16 18:42:47 UTC 2017
+1. The assumption was market forces will cause the best OpenStack deployment tools to win. But the sad reality is, market forces are causing people to look for non OpenStack solutions instead as the pain is still too high.
While k8s has a few different deployment tools currently, they are focused on getting the small bit of underlying plumbing deployed. Then you use the common k8s itself to deploy the rest. Adding a dashboard, dns, ingress, sdn, other component is easy in that world.
IMO, OpenStack needs to do something similar. Standardize a small core and get that easily deployable, then make it easy to deploy/upgrade the rest of the big tent projects on top of that, not next to it as currently is being done.
From: Joshua Harlow [harlowja at fastmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:24 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [chef] Making the Kitchen Great Again: A Retrospective on OpenStack & Chef
Alex Schultz wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Ed Leafe<ed at leafe.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Doug Hellmann<doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
>>> When we signed off on the Big Tent changes we said competition
>>> between projects was desirable, and that deployers and contributors
>>> would make choices based on the work being done in those competing
>>> projects. Basically, the market would decide on the "optimal"
>>> solution. It's a hard message to hear, but that seems to be what
>>> is happening.
>> We got much better at adding new things to OpenStack. We need to get better at letting go of old things.
>> -- Ed Leafe
> I agree that the market will dictate what continues to survive, but if
> you're not careful you may be speeding up the decline as the end user
> (deployer/operator/cloud consumer) will switch completely to something
> else because it becomes to difficult to continue to consume via what
> used to be there and no longer is. I thought the whole point was to
> not have vendor lock-in. Honestly I think the focus is too much on
> the development and not enough on the consumption of the development
> output. What are the point of all these features if no one can
> actually consume them.
+1 to that.
I've been in the boat of development and consumption of it for my
*whole* journey in openstack land and I can say the product as a whole
seems 'underbaked' with regards to the way people consume the
development output. It seems we have focused on how to do the dev. stuff
nicely and a nice process there, but sort of forgotten about all that
being quite useless if no one can consume them (without going through
much pain or paying a vendor).
This has or has IMHO been a factor in why certain are companies (and the
people they support) are exiting openstack and just going elsewhere.
I personally don't believe fixing this is 'let the market forces' figure
it out for us (what a slow & horrible way to let this play out; I'd
almost rather go pull my fingernails out). I do believe it will require
making opinionated decisions which we have all never been very good at.
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev