Open Stack

Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for bringing this up! We discussed this in our weekly ironic meeting
[1]. The consensus there seems to be to keep the ideas in IPA (with
priority=0). The additional code will be 'negligible' in size so ramdisk
won't be bloated due to this. Also, it keeps things simple. Having a
separate package means more maintenance overhead and confusion for our
users.

Would be good to hear from others, if they don't think this is a good idea.
Otherwise, I'm looking forward to Dmitry's RFEs on this :)

--ruby

[1]
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-ironic/%23openstack-ironic.2021-02-08.log.html#t2021-02-08T15:23:02

On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 8:02 AM Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> We have finally implemented in-band deploy steps (w00t!), and people
> started coming up with ideas. I have two currently:
> 1) configure arbitrary kernel command line arguments via grub
> 2) write NetworkManager configuration (for those not using cloud-init)
>
> I'm not sure how I feel about putting these in IPA proper, seems like we
> may go down a rabbit hole here. But what about a new project
> (ironic-python-agent-extras?) with a hardware manager providing a
> collection of potentially useful deploy steps?
>
> Or should we nonetheless just put them in IPA with priority=0?
>
> Opinions welcome.
>
> Dmitry
>
> --
> Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
> Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael
> O'Neill
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20210208/68350d65/attachment.html>