Open Stack

On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 12:42 -0400, Jeremy Freudberg wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:19 AM Jean-Philippe Evrard
> <jean-philippe at evrard.me> wrote:
> > [...]
> > I like this. Should this be self-asserted by the teams, or should we
> > provide some kind of validation? For teams that are very close but have
> > other openstack services projects dependencies, should the TC work on
> > helping removing those dependencies?
> > [...]
> 
> Yes the TC should support some kind of initiative to encourage
> standalone/reusability. I think self-assertion is fine at the start (I
> think this is really important info to publicize) ... but eventually
> there should be some kind of reference doc with clear criteria for
> what "standalone/reusable" actually means. Of course I'm really just
> thinking of services... libraries are another matter...
isnt that partly what constellations were ment to do

most of them unfrotnetely build on the compute kit
https://www.openstack.org/software/sample-configs/#compute-starter-kit
but it would be greate to have  version that did not need nova or neutorn
for example a storage kit that was just swift, keystone, cinder, glance and manila
or something similar.

a baremetal constalation that could be bifrost + ironic + optionally keystone and metal3?

i cant rememebr the name of the project that wanted to have a group of openstack compnets that
were useful for use in kubernetes but a constallation that showcased what comments were useful in
that context would also be great. 


>