Open Stack

On 09/10/17 12:41 -0700, Emilien Macchi wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>[...]
>> 1. A repo per role: Each role would have its own repo - this is the way I've
>> been developing it on Github. This model is closer to the ansible way of
>> doing
>> things and it'll make it easier to bundle, ship, and collaborate on,
>> individual
>> roles. Going this way would produce something similar to what the
>> openstack-ansible folks have.
>
>+1 on #1 for the composability.
>
>[...]
>
>Have we considered renaming it to something without tripleo in the name?
>Or is it too specific to TripleO that we want it in the name?

The roles don't have tripleo in their names. The only role that mentions tripleo
is tripleo specific. As for the APB, yeah, I had thought about renaming that
repo to something without tripleo in there: Perhaps just `ansible-k8s-apbs`.

I'm about to refactor this repo to remove all the code duplication. We should be
able to generate most of the APB code that's in there from a python script. We
could even have this script in tripleo_common, if it sounds sensible.

Thoughts?
Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20171010/fb7f795e/attachment.sig>