Hi James, thanks for the corrections/explanations. A comment inline (and
a further question) :)
On 09/26/2014 05:35 PM, James Slagle wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Heh, I just got off the phone with Monty talking about this :) Comments
inline...
On 09/22/2014 03:11 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
The quality designation is really important for the operator
community who are trying to work out what we can give to our end
users.
So, I think it's important to point out here that there are three different
kinds of operators/deployers:
* Ones who use a distribution of OpenStack (RDO, UCA, MOS, Nebula, Piston,
etc)
* Ones who use Triple-O
* Ones who go it alone and install (via source, a mixture of source and
packages, via config management like Chef or Puppet, etc)
I'm not sure TripleO fits in this list. It is not just a collection of
prescriptive OpenStack bits used to do a deployment. TripleO is
tooling to build OpenStack to deploy OpenStack. You can use whatever
"source" (packages, distribution, released tarballs, straight from
git) you want to build that OpenStack. TripleO could deploy your first
or third bullet item.
OK, fair point, thanks for that added bit of description.
In reality, you are referring to the last group, since operators in the
first group are saying "we are relying on a distribution to make informed
choices about what is ready for prime time because we tested these things
together". Operators in the second group are really only HP right now,
AFAICT, and Triple-O's "opinion" on the production readiness of the things
it deploys in the undercloud are roughly equal to "all of the integrated
release that the TC defines".
FWIW, TripleO offers deploying using distributions, by installing from
packages from the RDO repositories. There's nothing RDO specific about
it though, any packaged OpenStack distribution could be installed with
the TripleO tooling. RDO is just likely the most well tested.
Oh, good to know. Sorry, my information about Triple-O's undercloud
setup is clearly outdated. I thought that the undercloud was build from
source repositories devstack-style. Thanks for hitting me with a
cluestick. :)
Even when not installing via a distribution, and either directly from
trunk or the integrated release tarballs, I don't know that any
TripleO opinion enters into it. TripleO uses the integrated projects
of OpenStack to deploy an overcloud. In an overcloud, you may see
support for some incubated projects, depending on if there's interest
from the community for that support.
OK, interesting. So, in summary, Triple-O really doesn't offer much of a
"this is production-ready" stamp to anything based on whether it deploys
a project or not. So, operators who deploy with Triple-O would be in the
"you're on your own" camp from the bulleted list above. Would that be a
fair statement?
Best,
-jay
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
