On 21/04/16 12:26 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Joshua Harlow wrote:Thierry Carrez wrote:Adrian Otto wrote:This pursuit is a trap. Magnum should focus on making native container APIs available. We should not wrap APIs with leaky abstractions. The lowest common denominator of all COEs is an remarkably low value API that adds considerable complexity to Magnum that will not strategically advance OpenStack. If we instead focus our effort on making the COEs work better on OpenStack, that would be a winning strategy. Support and compliment our various COE ecosystems.So I'm all for avoiding 'wrap APIs with leaky abstractions' and 'making COEs work better on OpenStack' but I do dislike the part about COEs (plural) because it is once again the old non-opinionated problem that we (as a community) suffer from. Just my 2 cents, but I'd almost rather we pick one COE and integrate that deeply/tightly with openstack, and yes if this causes some part of the openstack community to be annoyed, meh, to bad. Sadly I have a feeling we are hurting ourselves by continuing to try to be everything and not picking anything (it's a general thing we, as a group, seem to be good at, lol). I mean I get the reason to just support all the things, but it feels like we as a community could just pick something, work together on figuring out how to pick one, using all these bright leaders we have to help make that possible (and yes this might piss some people off, to bad). Then work toward making that something great and move on...I see where you come from, but I think this is a bit different from, say, our choice to support multiple DLMs through Tooz instead of just picking ZooKeeper.I like to say that OpenStack solves the infrastructure provider problem: what should I install over my datacenter to serve the needs of all my end users. Some want VMs, some want bare metal, some want a Docker host, some want a Kubernetes cluster, some want a Mesos cluster. If we explicitly choose to, say, not support Mesos to only support Kubernetes users, we are no longer a universal solution for that infrastructure provider. He may deploy OpenStack but then will have to tell his end users that they can do everything but Mesos, and/or deploy a Mesos cluster manually on the side if his users end up deciding they want one.So while I agree we should get more opinionated on the implementation/deployer-side options (weeding out less supported options/drivers and driving more interoperability), I think we need to support as many infrastructure use cases as we can.Happy to talk about that with you next week :)
+1 to the above! Magnum's goal (as also mentioned by Kevin in another email) is similar to what Trove and Sahara do. I do not believe it should be opinionated. It solves a different set of issues and it sits in the provisioning plane next to other services akin. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev