+1 regarding completely removing the AWS automated install. I also believe we should initiate work to remove Ambari and allow individual vendors to provide their own installation packages built on top of a base platform install. See previous discussion here - https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0b4f1a604739b272cdd4c7e4f7ce641a6593d3faff9588382cdffe9b@%3Cdev.metron.apache.org%3E
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 8:24 AM Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> wrote: > +1 On the remove option. I think we should *completely remove* the > automated AWS deployment mechanism because it has been too difficult to > maintain, deploys an unsecure cluster by default, and is not the preferred > installation path for AWS. If a user wants to deploy to AWS, they should > launch their EC2 nodes, install Ambari, and then using the MPack to deploy > Metron. That is the preferred installation path for AWS. > > I would gladly volunteer to do this work if we can reach consensus on this > approach. > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:56 AM Simon Elliston Ball < > si...@simonellistonball.com> wrote: > > > Following many discussions on the user and dev lists in the past, a > number > > of users seem to have problems with the old ansible methods for > installing > > AWS. > > > > I am not aware of anyone who is maintaining this area (please shout if > you > > are willing to take on bringing this up to date) and we have a lot of > > outdated documentation on both the source tree and the wiki around older, > > now broken install methods. > > > > My proposal is that we consolidate the multitude of deployment methods, > > and: > > * remove or > > * Mark de-deprecated or > > * move to contrib > > The methods outside of the Ambari Mpack and full-dev methods of install. > > > > Does anyone have any thoughts about how we can clean this up and reduce > > the number of options that seem to be confusing new users coming to the > > platform? I am happy as long as the Ambari method currently used by the > > distributor (who, as you mostly know, I work for, in the interest of full > > disclosure) remains, and full-dev remains as is to avoid disruption to > > development process. I have no strong opinions on any of the other > > deployment methods, other than that their existence seems to be hindering > > new community members. > > > > Thoughts? > > Simon > > > > >
