Open Stack

On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:08 PM, John Postlethwait wrote:

> So, in short, your entire purpose here is to troll everyone? Nice… : /
> 

If you think that, you're likely part of the problem.

> You obviously care. You keep responding… You have been asked numerous times what we can do to NOT "stick us yet against in this situation in the future."  Why is that such a difficult question to answer? Do you have an answer? Is your answer to "not change anything, ever"? That is not likely or reasonable – so what can be done here? Have you seen the other thread about what this cinder/nova-volume change entails?
> 

This is an idiotic question. What can I suggest everyone do about as yet unproposed changes to OpenStack? Seriously?

> There ARE people here willing to hear it out if you have an answer, or an actionable suggestion, or process, or SOMETHING besides "get your heads out of your asses," which is hardly actionable, as it is vague and hopefully not a literal belief/suggestion…
> 
> So, George: What do you want from us here? You likely have some legitimate pain-points, concerns, and reasons to be upset, but they are absolutely lost in your angry and personally offensive responses. Can you maybe elaborate on what pain THIS change would cause, and how we might assuage that?
> 

This community needs offending.

How many years has it been? How many OpenStack upgrades can you point to that have been painless? How many interoperable, multi-vendor OpenStack clouds? How reliable is the API as an appropriate abstract representation of an OpenStack implementation that can be used to build an ecosystem?

The answer to those questions is:

- 3
- 0
- 0
- not at all

It is very clear that compatibility and upgradability is a huge issue. And a number of people, obviously including you, don't seem to grasp that.

We have silly comments like Michael's "I hate to fan the fire, but what would happened in cassandra if they _never_ updated their data structures."

1. Obviously I am not talking about never changing anything. Any suggestion otherwise is being willfully obtuse.
2. There's a big difference between systems like Cassandra that generally can have maintenance windows and environments like clouds which should NEVER have maintenance windows
3. Every single other cloud platform on the planet manages to support a much less painful upgrade path with a much higher level of interoperability.

In all of yours and Jon's and Brian's nonsense, I don't see any actual defense of the compatibility and interoperability of OpenStack deployments. I can only assume that's because you can't actually defend it, yet you nevertheless have your head stuck in the sand.

-George

--
George Reese - Chief Technology Officer, enStratus
e: george.reese at enstratus.com    Skype: nspollution    t: @GeorgeReese    p: +1.207.956.0217
enStratus: Enterprise Cloud Management - @enStratus - http://www.enstratus.com
To schedule a meeting with me: http://tungle.me/GeorgeReese

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20120712/a82397d6/attachment.html>