Open Stack

On 07/02/2018 03:31 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 28/06/18 15:09, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
>>   * made the barrier to testing/development as low as 'curl 
>> http://......minikube; minikube start' (this spurs adoption and 
>> contribution)
> 
> That's not so different from devstack though.
> 
>>   * not having large silo's in deployment projects allowed better 
>> communication on common tooling.
>>   * Operator focused architecture, not project based architecture. 
>> This simplifies the deployment situation greatly.
>>   * try whenever possible to focus on just the commons and push vendor 
>> specific needs to plugins so vendors can deal with vendor issues 
>> directly and not corrupt the core.
> 
> I agree with all of those, but to be fair to OpenStack, you're leaving 
> out arguably the most important one:
> 
>      * Installation instructions start with "assume a working datacenter"
> 
> They have that luxury; we do not. (To be clear, they are 100% right to 
> take full advantage of that luxury. Although if there are still folks 
> who go around saying that it's a trivial problem and OpenStackers must 
> all be idiots for making it look so difficult, they should really stop 
> embarrassing themselves.)

This.

There is nothing trivial about the creation of a working datacenter -- 
never mind a *well-running* datacenter. Comparing Kubernetes to 
OpenStack -- particular OpenStack's lower levels -- is missing this 
fundamental point and ends up comparing apples to oranges.

Best,
-jay