----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matt Micene" <[email protected]> > To: "Josh Berkus" <[email protected]> > > > * Depending on timing age of components in Fedora Atomic leads to a need > > for Magnum folks to rebuild image, at least until such time as more of the > > pieces are containerized (k8s/etcd/flanel) [1]. > > > > CoreOS is a standalone distro, and can move at whatever speed for whatever > component they like. Our packages move at the speed of Fedora. The Atomic > members may be maintainers of a component, but if Fedora decides that, for > example, docker 1.10 is a breaking change that needs to wait until F24, > there's not a lot we can do about it for a F23 based Atomic Host.
Certainly, the issue for the Magnum folks though is that until the services noted (kubernetes/etc/flannel) are containerized then the path they are pushed down to replace them is to rebuild the image from scratch which comes with its own pitfalls. Interestingly I don't believe they have actually been as concerned about the docker version in use thus far. > * Doesn't really feel like an active global community versus e.g. CoreOS. > > Yep, I agree. And fairly small overall. Part of why docs and finding > answers online are a problem. Depending on the problem, there's still the > possibility of needing to find 1 specific community member to get an > answer. This is also why things like containerized components are just > open PRs at this point. (IMO) There does also seem to be an issue of it being kind of spread out, even when posting this I wasn't sure if it belongs here or on the Fedora cloud list (and of course there are equivalent IRC channels for each too), and I just today learned there is an ask.atomicproject.io as well! Not sure what if anything can be done about this. > the Magnum folks are primarily using the Fedora Atomic images as their base > > but I was recently pointed to this IRC discussion where the Magnum folks > > outlined some of their concerns resulting from interacting with the Atomic > > images which are causing them to look elsewhere: > > > I don't think anyone is specifically ignoring downstream use, but I wasn't > aware that there *was* any downstream use. Based on: > > https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/2015-April/msg00075.html > > I didn't know Magnum was back to trying Fedora Atomic. Maybe someone else > in the channel or on the list has some knowledge of downstreams that we > need to make people aware of? > > - Matt M The proposal to instead use a normal Fedora cloud image is mainly a result of the fact that the tools for customizing such an image are much better understood and documented. At this time though I believe the image used in the CI gate for Magnum is still one of these customized Fedora Atomic Host 21 images: https://fedorapeople.org/groups/magnum/ There is a proposal up to make the required tweaks to Magnum to attempt to use Fedora Atomic Host 23 image: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/276232/ Timing wise the reality is though that even if the above is merged for now I imagine they will eventually have a need/want to update one of kubernetes/flannel/etcd before F24 timeframe bringing them back around to the question about containerization of these pieces :). -Steve > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Josh Berkus <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 02/24/2016 07:13 AM, Steve Gordon wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Not sure if this is the right place as the Magnum folks are primarily > >> using the Fedora Atomic images as their base but I was recently pointed to > >> this IRC discussion where the Magnum folks outlined some of their concerns > >> resulting from interacting with the Atomic images which are causing them > >> to > >> look elsewhere: > >> > > > > Seems like as good a place as any. > > > > > >> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-containers/%23openstack-containers.2016-02-15.log.html > >> > >> This is in some ways a continuation of this earlier thread: > >> > >> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/thread.html#85699 > >> > >> Trying to boil down the comments into a summary: > >> > >> * Depending on timing age of components in Fedora Atomic leads to a need > >> for Magnum folks to rebuild image, at least until such time as more of the > >> pieces are containerized (k8s/etcd/flanel) [1]. > >> > > > > One thing I don't get from the chat is examples. Are they really building > > this with a release of Kubernetes which is < 2 weeks old? Or are our > > packages older than that? > > > > * Rebuild image documentation lacks troubleshooting information (I > >> encountered this myself, there are plenty of places for things to go off > >> the rails in the compose and create-vm-disk steps and the tooling provides > >> very limited error output in some cases). > >> > > > > Yeah, docs are a problem. > > > > * Lack of clarity around if or when originally proposed build cadences > >> will be hit for Fedora Atomic - I think this was originally proposed as > >> 2-weekly but it's hard to tell if that has actually been hit to an > >> outsider. To me it looks like yes [2] but do we record anywhere when a new > >> build was pushed out to the mirrors as the current stable? > >> * Doesn't really feel like an active global community versus e.g. CoreOS. > >> I know this is a challenging thing to "solve" but I list it as it is part > >> of their concern, I myself have asked a question in the #atomic IRC and it > >> was eventually answered but only when US East coast folks were up and > >> awake > >> again. > >> > > > > This seems to center around availability on IRC. Part of the problem > > there is that folks are spread out across 5-6 different channels > > (#fedora-cloud, #nulecule, etc.). I'll try to get people to remember to > > also log into #atomic. > > > > I know this is very high level feedback in many cases and difficult to > >> action but wanted to highlight it . Scott has already answered my query on > >> the Fedora cloud list w.r.t. containerization plans for the services > >> mentioned which I think would help Magnum folks a lot [1], and I see we > >> are > >> apparently now doing two-weekly updates to the Fedora cloud image [2] > >> though as I mentioned it would be great if we can illustrate the history > >> of > >> this in terms of regular builds produced/pushed. > >> > > > > I think it's pretty valid feedback and I'm glad you're relaying it to us. > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Josh Berkus > > Project Atomic > > Red Hat OSAS > > > > > -- Steve Gordon, Sr. Technical Product Manager, Red Hat OpenStack Platform
