Is the problem perhaps that no one is aware of other projects using
Barbican? Is the status on the project navigator alarming (it looks
like some of this information is potentially out of date)? Has
Barbican been deemed too hard to deploy?
I really want to understand why so many projects feel the need to
implement their own secrets storage. This seems a bit short-sighted
and foolish. While these projects are making themselves easier to
deploy, if not done properly they are potentially endangering their
users and that seems like a bigger problem than deploying Barbican to
me.
Just food for thought, and I'm pretty sure it's probably the same for
various others; but one part that I feel is a reason that folks don't
deploy barbican is because most companies need a solution that works
beyond OpenStack and whether people like it or not, a OpenStack specific
solution isn't really something that is attractive (especially with the
growing adoption of other things that are *not* OpenStack).
Another reason, some companies have or are already building/built
solutions that offer functionality like what's in
https://github.com/square/keywhiz and others and such things integrate
with kubernetes and **their existing** systems ... natively already so
why would they bother with a service like barbican?
IMHO we've got to get our heads out of the sand with regard to some of
this stuff, expecting people to consume all things OpenStack and only
all things OpenStack is a losing battle; companies will consume what is
right for their need, whether that is in the OpenStack community or not,
it doesn't really matter (maybe at one point it did).
My 2 cents,
Josh
__________________________________________________________________________
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
