Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Sylwester Brzeczkowski 
+1 to drop nailgun-agent and replace it with python script with ohai call
or ironic-inspector!

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Alexander Saprykin 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Thank you for the opinions about this problem.
>
> I would agree with Roman, that it is always better to reuse solutions than
> re-inventing the wheel. We should investigate possibility of using
> ironic-inspector and integrating it into fuel.
>
> Best regards,
> Alexander Saprykin
>
> 2016-03-15 13:03 GMT+01:00 Sergii Golovatiuk :
>
>> My strong +1 to drop off nailgun-agent completely in favour of
>> ironic-inspector. Even taking into consideration we'lll need to
>> extend  ironic-inspector for fuel needs.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Sergii Golovatiuk,
>> Skype #golserge
>> IRC #holser
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Roman Prykhodchenko 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My opition on this is that we have too many re-invented wheels in Fuel
>>> and it’s better think about replacing them with something we can re-use
>>> than re-inventing them one more time.
>>>
>>> Let’s take a look at Ironic and try to figure out how we can use its
>>> features for the same purpose.
>>>
>>>
>>> - romcheg
>>> > 15 бер. 2016 р. о 10:38 Neil Jerram 
>>> написав(ла):
>>> >
>>> > On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:
>>> >> Alexander,
>>> >>
>>> >> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
>>> >> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just
>>> >> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about
>>> plugins,
>>> >> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery
>>> >> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we
>>> >> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch
>>> >> to ironic-inspector.
>>> >
>>> > +1 in general terms.  It's strange to me that there are so many
>>> > OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in
>>> > their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means
>>> > that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these
>>> > systems.  It would be great to see some consolidation.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >   Neil
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> __
>>> > 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
>>
>>
>
> __
> 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
>
>


-- 
*Sylwester Brzeczkowski*
Python Software Engineer
Product Development-Core : Product Engineering
__
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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Alexander Saprykin 
Dear all,

Thank you for the opinions about this problem.

I would agree with Roman, that it is always better to reuse solutions than
re-inventing the wheel. We should investigate possibility of using
ironic-inspector and integrating it into fuel.

Best regards,
Alexander Saprykin

2016-03-15 13:03 GMT+01:00 Sergii Golovatiuk :

> My strong +1 to drop off nailgun-agent completely in favour of
> ironic-inspector. Even taking into consideration we'lll need to
> extend  ironic-inspector for fuel needs.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergii Golovatiuk,
> Skype #golserge
> IRC #holser
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Roman Prykhodchenko 
> wrote:
>
>> My opition on this is that we have too many re-invented wheels in Fuel
>> and it’s better think about replacing them with something we can re-use
>> than re-inventing them one more time.
>>
>> Let’s take a look at Ironic and try to figure out how we can use its
>> features for the same purpose.
>>
>>
>> - romcheg
>> > 15 бер. 2016 р. о 10:38 Neil Jerram 
>> написав(ла):
>> >
>> > On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:
>> >> Alexander,
>> >>
>> >> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
>> >> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just
>> >> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about
>> plugins,
>> >> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery
>> >> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we
>> >> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch
>> >> to ironic-inspector.
>> >
>> > +1 in general terms.  It's strange to me that there are so many
>> > OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in
>> > their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means
>> > that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these
>> > systems.  It would be great to see some consolidation.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >   Neil
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> __
>> > 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
>
>
__
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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Sergii Golovatiuk 
My strong +1 to drop off nailgun-agent completely in favour of
ironic-inspector. Even taking into consideration we'lll need to
extend  ironic-inspector for fuel needs.

--
Best regards,
Sergii Golovatiuk,
Skype #golserge
IRC #holser

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Roman Prykhodchenko  wrote:

> My opition on this is that we have too many re-invented wheels in Fuel and
> it’s better think about replacing them with something we can re-use than
> re-inventing them one more time.
>
> Let’s take a look at Ironic and try to figure out how we can use its
> features for the same purpose.
>
>
> - romcheg
> > 15 бер. 2016 р. о 10:38 Neil Jerram 
> написав(ла):
> >
> > On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:
> >> Alexander,
> >>
> >> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
> >> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just
> >> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about plugins,
> >> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery
> >> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we
> >> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch
> >> to ironic-inspector.
> >
> > +1 in general terms.  It's strange to me that there are so many
> > OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in
> > their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means
> > that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these
> > systems.  It would be great to see some consolidation.
> >
> > Regards,
> >   Neil
> >
> >
> >
> __
> > 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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Roman Prykhodchenko 
My opition on this is that we have too many re-invented wheels in Fuel and it’s 
better think about replacing them with something we can re-use than 
re-inventing them one more time.

Let’s take a look at Ironic and try to figure out how we can use its features 
for the same purpose.


- romcheg
> 15 бер. 2016 р. о 10:38 Neil Jerram  написав(ла):
> 
> On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:
>> Alexander,
>> 
>> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
>> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just
>> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about plugins,
>> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery
>> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we
>> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch
>> to ironic-inspector.
> 
> +1 in general terms.  It's strange to me that there are so many
> OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in
> their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means
> that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these
> systems.  It would be great to see some consolidation.
> 
> Regards,
>   Neil
> 
> 
> __
> 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



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__
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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Neil Jerram 
On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:
> Alexander,
>
> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just
> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about plugins,
> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery
> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we
> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch
> to ironic-inspector.

+1 in general terms.  It's strange to me that there are so many 
OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in 
their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means 
that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these 
systems.  It would be great to see some consolidation.

Regards,
Neil


__
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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-15 Thread Vladimir Kozhukalov 
Alexander,

We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types,
etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just because
it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about plugins, but let's
look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery component (btw
written in python) and I can't see any reason why we should continue
putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch to ironic-inspector.





Vladimir Kozhukalov

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 7:41 PM, Evgeniy L  wrote:

> Hi Alexander, thanks for bringing this up.
>
> From your list of problems the only problem which I see is 1st, 2nd and
> 3rd are solvable even with current implementation.
>
> Also I don't think that we should continue developing our own HW discovery
> mechanism, we should consider switching to ironic-inspector, and get common
> discovery system [0]. We need to evaluate it and get a list of features
> which we may need from it and discuss with ironic team.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [0] https://github.com/openstack/ironic-inspector
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Alexander Saprykin <
> asapry...@mirantis.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have fuel-nailgun-agent project which was initially written on Ruby.
>> It is 900 lines of code single script, that collects and provides to the
>> nailgun information about node's hardware.
>>
>> In the past several iteration we had to introduce new modifications to
>> that script we discovered couple of major problems with it.
>>
>> 1. Most of our software engineers are Python programmers and it's quite
>> complicated to add new features. We have or to write ugly ruby code or to
>> wait for somebody who knows it to write it.
>>
>> 2. Nailgun agent doesn't have tests. At all.
>>
>> 3. It would be good to have a plugins support in the nailgun agent. In
>> case if customer wants to collect any extra information about nodes that
>> can be used in fuel plugins.
>>
>> Possible obstacles:
>>
>> Nailgun agent depends from Ruby library called *ohai* which provides
>> hardware information.
>>
>> Our proposal is to:
>>
>> 1. Rewrite fuel nailgun agent to Python.
>>
>> 2. Add proper unit tests.
>>
>> 3. Ohai library can be used as CLI tool or it can be replaced with pure
>> python solution (to be investigated)
>>
>> 4. Nailgun agent can be extended with plugins based on steevedore.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Alexander Saprykin
>>
>> __
>> 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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-14 Thread Evgeniy L 
Hi Alexander, thanks for bringing this up.

>From your list of problems the only problem which I see is 1st, 2nd and 3rd
are solvable even with current implementation.

Also I don't think that we should continue developing our own HW discovery
mechanism, we should consider switching to ironic-inspector, and get common
discovery system [0]. We need to evaluate it and get a list of features
which we may need from it and discuss with ironic team.

Thanks,

[0] https://github.com/openstack/ironic-inspector

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Alexander Saprykin 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We have fuel-nailgun-agent project which was initially written on Ruby. It
> is 900 lines of code single script, that collects and provides to the
> nailgun information about node's hardware.
>
> In the past several iteration we had to introduce new modifications to
> that script we discovered couple of major problems with it.
>
> 1. Most of our software engineers are Python programmers and it's quite
> complicated to add new features. We have or to write ugly ruby code or to
> wait for somebody who knows it to write it.
>
> 2. Nailgun agent doesn't have tests. At all.
>
> 3. It would be good to have a plugins support in the nailgun agent. In
> case if customer wants to collect any extra information about nodes that
> can be used in fuel plugins.
>
> Possible obstacles:
>
> Nailgun agent depends from Ruby library called *ohai* which provides
> hardware information.
>
> Our proposal is to:
>
> 1. Rewrite fuel nailgun agent to Python.
>
> 2. Add proper unit tests.
>
> 3. Ohai library can be used as CLI tool or it can be replaced with pure
> python solution (to be investigated)
>
> 4. Nailgun agent can be extended with plugins based on steevedore.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Alexander Saprykin
>
> __
> 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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-14 Thread Bogdan Dobrelya 
On 03/14/2016 04:13 PM, Alexander Saprykin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We have fuel-nailgun-agent project which was initially written on Ruby.
> It is 900 lines of code single script, that collects and provides to the
> nailgun information about node's hardware.
> 
> In the past several iteration we had to introduce new modifications to
> that script we discovered couple of major problems with it.
> 
> 1. Most of our software engineers are Python programmers and it's quite
> complicated to add new features. We have or to write ugly ruby code or
> to wait for somebody who knows it to write it.

While I agree with that, I have to ask: Do you have same plans for
Astute and mcollective?

> 
> 2. Nailgun agent doesn't have tests. At all.
> 
> 3. It would be good to have a plugins support in the nailgun agent. In
> case if customer wants to collect any extra information about nodes that
> can be used in fuel plugins.
> 
> Possible obstacles:
> 
> Nailgun agent depends from Ruby library called *ohai* which provides
> hardware information.
> 
> Our proposal is to:
> 
> 1. Rewrite fuel nailgun agent to Python.
> 
> 2. Add proper unit tests.
> 
> 3. Ohai library can be used as CLI tool or it can be replaced with pure
> python solution (to be investigated)
> 
> 4. Nailgun agent can be extended with plugins based on steevedore.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Alexander Saprykin
> 
> 
> __
> 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,
Bogdan Dobrelya,
Irc #bogdando

__
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] Rewriting nailgun agent on Python proposal

2016-03-14 Thread Alexander Saprykin 
Hi,

We have fuel-nailgun-agent project which was initially written on Ruby. It
is 900 lines of code single script, that collects and provides to the
nailgun information about node's hardware.

In the past several iteration we had to introduce new modifications to that
script we discovered couple of major problems with it.

1. Most of our software engineers are Python programmers and it's quite
complicated to add new features. We have or to write ugly ruby code or to
wait for somebody who knows it to write it.

2. Nailgun agent doesn't have tests. At all.

3. It would be good to have a plugins support in the nailgun agent. In case
if customer wants to collect any extra information about nodes that can be
used in fuel plugins.

Possible obstacles:

Nailgun agent depends from Ruby library called *ohai* which provides
hardware information.

Our proposal is to:

1. Rewrite fuel nailgun agent to Python.

2. Add proper unit tests.

3. Ohai library can be used as CLI tool or it can be replaced with pure
python solution (to be investigated)

4. Nailgun agent can be extended with plugins based on steevedore.


Best regards,
Alexander Saprykin
__
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