subject:"\[openstack\-dev\] \[Fuel\]\[Bareon\] Fuel \& Bareon integration \(fuel modularisation\)"

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-29 Thread Evgeniy L

Hi Aleksey,

Since Fuel's FF is on 2nd of March, I don't think that full switch from
fuel-agent + nailgun volume manager to Bareon will happen.
Also Bareon will have separate from Fuel release cycle, so you will have
to land the feature first into Bareon and then to Fuel.

Could you please provide a bit more information on what features are
needed in the agent for 9.0 Fuel release?

Thanks,

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev <
azvyagint...@mirantis.com> wrote:

>
> Guys, do you have any plans to achieve integration for fuel9\fuel-next
> ?(and final switching from fuel-agent to BareOn will be...?)
> We are going to implement some new features for fuel - and the main
> question should we push it into fuel-agent or in newer BareOn?
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Tomasz Napierala <
> tnapier...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree with Evgeny: from work organization it would more optimal to have
>> 2 repos. API and system facing programming are completely different
>> domains, requiring different skill sets. In my opinion separation would
>> lower the entry barriers.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> > On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:53, Evgeniy L  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Igor,
>> >
>> > Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically
>> fuel_agent,
>> > which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
>> > In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need
>> some wrapper,
>> > which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented
>> in Bareon-API.
>> > User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database
>> if she/he
>> > wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration,
>> which is not
>> > Fuel use case.
>> > If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo,
>> there is no
>> > reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams
>> working
>> > on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user
>> facing api
>> > vs low level tools.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>> ikalnit...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>> > > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
>> implementation
>> >
>> > For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
>> > part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
>> > will be driven by bareon-api?
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel
>> modularisation
>> > > activity.
>> > > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
>> > >
>> > > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a
>> demo [1]
>> > > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and
>> Bareon
>> > > [2] can
>> > > be done.
>> > >
>> > > To summarise the implementation:
>> > > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
>> > > partitioning
>> > >   related data and allows to edit it
>> > > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses
>> Bareon-API
>> > >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily
>> switch
>> > > between
>> > >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
>> > > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
>> > > Bareon-API
>> > >
>> > > Next steps:
>> > > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
>> implementation
>> > > * create a spec for Fuel project
>> > > * create a spec for Bareon project
>> > >
>> > > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread,
>> also
>> > > you can
>> > > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks!
>> > >
>> > > [0]
>> > >
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
>> > > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
>> > > [2]
>> > >
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
>> > > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
>> > > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> __
>> > > 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
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> __
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> __
>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Unsubscribe:
>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-29 Thread Aleksey Zvyagintsev

Guys, do you have any plans to achieve integration for fuel9\fuel-next
?(and final switching from fuel-agent to BareOn will be...?)
We are going to implement some new features for fuel - and the main
question should we push it into fuel-agent or in newer BareOn?


On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Tomasz Napierala 
wrote:

> I agree with Evgeny: from work organization it would more optimal to have
> 2 repos. API and system facing programming are completely different
> domains, requiring different skill sets. In my opinion separation would
> lower the entry barriers.
>
> Regards,
>
> > On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:53, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Igor,
> >
> > Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically
> fuel_agent,
> > which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
> > In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need
> some wrapper,
> > which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented
> in Bareon-API.
> > User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database if
> she/he
> > wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration,
> which is not
> > Fuel use case.
> > If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo,
> there is no
> > reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams
> working
> > on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user
> facing api
> > vs low level tools.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
> > > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
> >
> > For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
> > part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
> > will be driven by bareon-api?
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
> > > activity.
> > > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
> > >
> > > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo
> [1]
> > > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and
> Bareon
> > > [2] can
> > > be done.
> > >
> > > To summarise the implementation:
> > > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
> > > partitioning
> > >   related data and allows to edit it
> > > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses
> Bareon-API
> > >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily
> switch
> > > between
> > >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
> > > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
> > > Bareon-API
> > >
> > > Next steps:
> > > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
> implementation
> > > * create a spec for Fuel project
> > > * create a spec for Bareon project
> > >
> > > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread,
> also
> > > you can
> > > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > [0]
> > >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
> > > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
> > > [2]
> > >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
> > > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
> > > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
>
> --
> Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala
> Product Engineering - Poland
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __
> 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
>



-- 
---
Best regards,
   Aleksey Zvyagintsev
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-29 Thread Aleksey Zvyagintsev

In general - fuel-bootstrap improvements (actually- fuel-agent manager and
utils)
So, looks like no option for 9.0 - we will work with fuel-agent, and then
with porting(re-writing) it to bareon.


On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:

> Hi Aleksey,
>
> Since Fuel's FF is on 2nd of March, I don't think that full switch from
> fuel-agent + nailgun volume manager to Bareon will happen.
> Also Bareon will have separate from Fuel release cycle, so you will have
> to land the feature first into Bareon and then to Fuel.
>
> Could you please provide a bit more information on what features are
> needed in the agent for 9.0 Fuel release?
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Aleksey Zvyagintsev <
> azvyagint...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Guys, do you have any plans to achieve integration for fuel9\fuel-next
>> ?(and final switching from fuel-agent to BareOn will be...?)
>> We are going to implement some new features for fuel - and the main
>> question should we push it into fuel-agent or in newer BareOn?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Tomasz Napierala <
>> tnapier...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with Evgeny: from work organization it would more optimal to
>>> have 2 repos. API and system facing programming are completely different
>>> domains, requiring different skill sets. In my opinion separation would
>>> lower the entry barriers.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> > On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:53, Evgeniy L  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Igor,
>>> >
>>> > Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically
>>> fuel_agent,
>>> > which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
>>> > In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need
>>> some wrapper,
>>> > which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented
>>> in Bareon-API.
>>> > User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database
>>> if she/he
>>> > wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration,
>>> which is not
>>> > Fuel use case.
>>> > If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo,
>>> there is no
>>> > reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams
>>> working
>>> > on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user
>>> facing api
>>> > vs low level tools.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>>> ikalnit...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>>> > > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
>>> implementation
>>> >
>>> > For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
>>> > part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
>>> > will be driven by bareon-api?
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
>>> > > Hi,
>>> > >
>>> > > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel
>>> modularisation
>>> > > activity.
>>> > > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
>>> > >
>>> > > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a
>>> demo [1]
>>> > > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and
>>> Bareon
>>> > > [2] can
>>> > > be done.
>>> > >
>>> > > To summarise the implementation:
>>> > > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
>>> > > partitioning
>>> > >   related data and allows to edit it
>>> > > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses
>>> Bareon-API
>>> > >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily
>>> switch
>>> > > between
>>> > >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
>>> > > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
>>> > > Bareon-API
>>> > >
>>> > > Next steps:
>>> > > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
>>> implementation
>>> > > * create a spec for Fuel project
>>> > > * create a spec for Bareon project
>>> > >
>>> > > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread,
>>> also
>>> > > you can
>>> > > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks!
>>> > >
>>> > > [0]
>>> > >
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
>>> > > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
>>> > > [2]
>>> > >
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
>>> > > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
>>> > > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> __
>>> > > 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
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> __
>>> > OpenStack Development

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-28 Thread Tomasz Napierala

I agree with Evgeny: from work organization it would more optimal to have 2 
repos. API and system facing programming are completely different domains, 
requiring different skill sets. In my opinion separation would lower the entry 
barriers.

Regards,

> On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:53, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> 
> Hi Igor,
> 
> Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically 
> fuel_agent,
> which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
> In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need some 
> wrapper,
> which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented in 
> Bareon-API.
> User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database if 
> she/he
> wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration, which 
> is not
> Fuel use case.
> If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo, there is 
> no
> reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams working
> on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user facing 
> api
> vs low level tools.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky  
> wrote:
> > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
> 
> For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
> part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
> will be driven by bareon-api?
> 
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
> > activity.
> > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
> >
> > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo [1]
> > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and Bareon
> > [2] can
> > be done.
> >
> > To summarise the implementation:
> > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
> > partitioning
> >   related data and allows to edit it
> > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses Bareon-API
> >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily switch
> > between
> >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
> > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
> > Bareon-API
> >
> > Next steps:
> > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
> > * create a spec for Fuel project
> > * create a spec for Bareon project
> >
> > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread, also
> > you can
> > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [0]
> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
> > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
> > [2]
> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
> > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
> > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
> >
> >
> > __
> > 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
> >
> 
> __
> 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
> 
> __
> 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

-- 
Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala
Product Engineering - Poland







__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-18 Thread Aleksey Zvyagintsev

+1 For Evgeniy,

Also guys, as you know - fuel-agent now uses for a lot of different things
: IBP\bootstrap\ironic\disk_managment at many other.
I hope you are not going to remove all this functionality with re-factoring
process.


On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:

> Hi Igor,
>
> Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically
> fuel_agent,
> which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
> In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need some
> wrapper,
> which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented in
> Bareon-API.
> User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database if
> she/he
> wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration,
> which is not
> Fuel use case.
> If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo, there
> is no
> reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams
> working
> on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user
> facing api
> vs low level tools.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>
>> > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
>>
>> For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
>> part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
>> will be driven by bareon-api?
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
>> > activity.
>> > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
>> >
>> > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo
>> [1]
>> > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and
>> Bareon
>> > [2] can
>> > be done.
>> >
>> > To summarise the implementation:
>> > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
>> > partitioning
>> >   related data and allows to edit it
>> > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses
>> Bareon-API
>> >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily switch
>> > between
>> >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
>> > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
>> > Bareon-API
>> >
>> > Next steps:
>> > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready
>> implementation
>> > * create a spec for Fuel project
>> > * create a spec for Bareon project
>> >
>> > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread,
>> also
>> > you can
>> > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > [0]
>> >
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
>> > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
>> > [2]
>> >
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
>> > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
>> > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> __
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> __
>> 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
>>
>
>
> __
> 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
>
>


-- 
---
Best regards,
   Aleksey Zvyagintsev
__
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

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-17 Thread Evgeniy L

Hi,

Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
activity.
Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.

Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo [1]
(thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and Bareon
[2] can
be done.

To summarise the implementation:
* we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
partitioning
  related data and allows to edit it
* for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses Bareon-API
  to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily switch
between
  classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
* when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
Bareon-API

Next steps:
* create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
* create a spec for Fuel project
* create a spec for Bareon project

If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread, also
you can
find us on #openstack-bareon channel.

Thanks!

[0]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
[2]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
[3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
[4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-17 Thread Igor Kalnitsky

> create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation

For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
will be driven by bareon-api?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
> activity.
> Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
>
> Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo [1]
> (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and Bareon
> [2] can
> be done.
>
> To summarise the implementation:
> * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
> partitioning
>   related data and allows to edit it
> * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses Bareon-API
>   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily switch
> between
>   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
> * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
> Bareon-API
>
> Next steps:
> * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
> * create a spec for Fuel project
> * create a spec for Bareon project
>
> If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread, also
> you can
> find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [0]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
> [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
> [2]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
> [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
>
>
> __
> 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
>

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

2015-12-17 Thread Evgeniy L

Hi Igor,

Bareon by itself doesn't have any REST interface, Bareon is basically
fuel_agent,
which is framework + CLI wrapper to use it as an agent.
In order to store and edit required entities in the database we need some
wrapper,
which adds this functionality. This simple wrapper will be implemented in
Bareon-API.
User should be able to use Bareon without any additional API/Database if
she/he
wants to do some basic stuff without need to store the configuration, which
is not
Fuel use case.
If the question was specifically about Bareon-API in separate repo, there
is no
reason to store it in a single repo, since we may have separate teams
working
on those sub-projects and those solve a bit different problems, user facing
api
vs low level tools.

Thanks,

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> > create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
>
> For what reason do we need a separate repo? I thought API will be a
> part of bareon repo. Or bareon is just a provisioning agent, which
> will be driven by bareon-api?
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some time ago, we’ve started a discussion [0] about Fuel modularisation
> > activity.
> > Due to unexpected circumstances POC has been delayed.
> >
> > Regarding to partitioning/provisioning system, we have POC with a demo
> [1]
> > (thanks to Sylwester), which shows how the integration of Fuel and Bareon
> > [2] can
> > be done.
> >
> > To summarise the implementation:
> > * we have a simple implementation of Bareon-API [3], which stores
> > partitioning
> >   related data and allows to edit it
> > * for Nailgun new extension has been implemented [4], which uses
> Bareon-API
> >   to store partitioning information, so we will be able to easily switch
> > between
> >   classic volume_manager implementation and Bareon-API extension
> > * when provisioning gets started, extensions retrieves the data from
> > Bareon-API
> >
> > Next steps:
> > * create Bareon-API repository, and start production ready implementation
> > * create a spec for Fuel project
> > * create a spec for Bareon project
> >
> > If you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them in this thread, also
> > you can
> > find us on #openstack-bareon channel.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [0]
> >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077025.html
> > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJM8i7DL0w
> > [2]
> >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/082397.html
> > [3] https://github.com/Mirantis/bareon-api
> > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/250864/
> >
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
> >
>
> __
> 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
>
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Bareon] Fuel & Bareon integration (fuel modularisation)

8 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information