To trow into the mix clear Linux reimplemented minimal cloud-init in C. See
https://github.com/clearlinux/clr-cloud-init
/Rickard von Essen
On Oct 29, 2015 2:47 PM, "Subhendu Ghosh" wrote:
>
> On Oct 29, 2015 9:30 AM, "Josh Boyer" wrote:
> > thinking... :)
> >
> > > Also, one of the CentOS GSoC
>
> Because we can not even guess what all use cases people have while using a
> cloud instance?
I'd say we have the same process with Server. Most people take a minimal
server image and deploy required applications with their own tooling.
There are some opinions (roles) that exist to do some co
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 2015 10:36, "Joe Brockmeier" wrote:
>>
>> On 11/03/2015 11:24 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
>> > I've been a fan of testcloud for this use case because I'm of the
>> > opinion that vagrant is overkill when all I want to do is boot a cloud
On 03/11/15, Matt Micene wrote:
> I think this highlights the problem we're currently seeing with the Fedora
> Cloud Base adoption
>
> On 10/28/2015 07:42 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > Actually, I don't think that's true. Take a look at "fr1st p0st":
> > >
> > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/p
On Nov 3, 2015 10:36, "Joe Brockmeier" wrote:
>
> On 11/03/2015 11:24 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
> > I've been a fan of testcloud for this use case because I'm of the
> > opinion that vagrant is overkill when all I want to do is boot a cloud
> > image and ssh in.
>
> I've lost track, have we packaged
- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Brockmeier"
> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" ,
> ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 11:43:27 AM
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Cloud and Server Workgroup relationship
>
> Hi all,
>
> Duri
>
> However another important point to make here is that "run a cloud image
> locally
> in libvirt on a workstation" is basically the use case for Vagrant - it does
> things
> like detecting the IP address so you can `vagrant ssh` etc.
+1000
I'm trying to reproduce an issue in a not-vagrant-bu
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 11/03/2015 11:24 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
>> I've been a fan of testcloud for this use case because I'm of the
>> opinion that vagrant is overkill when all I want to do is boot a cloud
>> image and ssh in.
>
> I've lost track, have we packa
On 11/03/2015 11:24 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
> I've been a fan of testcloud for this use case because I'm of the
> opinion that vagrant is overkill when all I want to do is boot a cloud
> image and ssh in.
I've lost track, have we packaged that for F23? I would love to
recommend it.
Best,
jzb
--
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, at 04:28 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>> Is that the same as this procedure [1]? Or else can you point at the details?
>>
>> [1] http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2014/10/getting-started-with-cloud-init/
>
> Yes. When I wan
I think this highlights the problem we're currently seeing with the Fedora
Cloud Base adoption
On 10/28/2015 07:42 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Actually, I don't think that's true. Take a look at "fr1st p0st":
> >
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2010-January/01.html
Ther
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, at 04:28 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Is that the same as this procedure [1]? Or else can you point at the details?
>
> [1] http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2014/10/getting-started-with-cloud-init/
Yes. When I want to test the cloud image I often use:
https://github.com/cgwa
>> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 09:30:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>> > > On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > >> The *could* be the same thing,
>> > >> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the
>> > >> single
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 09:30:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > > On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >> The *could* be the same thing,
> > >> except cloud-init is terrib
On Thursday, October 29, 2015 09:30:29 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> The *could* be the same thing,
> >> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the single
> >> offering we had fo
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 11:20:36AM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> >> CoreOS has built cloud-config as a Go implementation of cloud-init to get
>> >> around the python problem.
>> > Did they tell anyone they were doing that? I'm curious if
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 11:20:36AM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >> CoreOS has built cloud-config as a Go implementation of cloud-init to get
> >> around the python problem.
> > Did they tell anyone they were doing that? I'm curious if we have two
> > groups that could be working together here th
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> The *could* be the same thing,
>> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the single
>> offering we had for some kind of C&S WG I would cry. I hate it
>> because it is ridicul
>> On Oct 29, 2015 9:30 AM, "Josh Boyer" wrote:
>>> thinking... :)
>>>
>>> > Also, one of the CentOS GSoC projects was "Flamingo" "a lightweight
>>> > contextualization tool that aims to handle initialization of cloud
>>> > instances." [1] Maybe this is something we could look at for F24? CC'ing
>
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 10/29/2015 09:50 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Did they tell anyone they were doing that? I'm curious if we have two
>> groups that could be working together here that are now duplicating
>> effort simply because of lack of communication.
>
>
On 10/29/2015 09:50 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Did they tell anyone they were doing that? I'm curious if we have two
> groups that could be working together here that are now duplicating
> effort simply because of lack of communication.
C'mon Josh. That *never* happens.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeie
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Subhendu Ghosh wrote:
>
> On Oct 29, 2015 9:30 AM, "Josh Boyer" wrote:
>> thinking... :)
>>
>> > Also, one of the CentOS GSoC projects was "Flamingo" "a lightweight
>> > contextualization tool that aims to handle initialization of cloud
>> > instances." [1] Maybe
On Oct 29, 2015 9:30 AM, "Josh Boyer" wrote:
> thinking... :)
>
> > Also, one of the CentOS GSoC projects was "Flamingo" "a lightweight
> > contextualization tool that aims to handle initialization of cloud
> > instances." [1] Maybe this is something we could look at for F24? CC'ing
> > Tamer Tas,
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Michael McGrath wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>>> On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
The *could* be the same thing,
except cloud-init is terrible and I hate i
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 10/29/2015 09:33 AM, Michael McGrath wrote:
>> If you hate cloud-init, then you'll love rich boot. Which is
>> essentially a handoff at boot time from cloud-init to Ansible for
>> further configuration.
>
> What's the state of this at th
On 10/29/2015 09:33 AM, Michael McGrath wrote:
> If you hate cloud-init, then you'll love rich boot. Which is
> essentially a handoff at boot time from cloud-init to Ansible for
> further configuration.
What's the state of this at the moment?
--
Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
j...@redhat.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>> On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> The *could* be the same thing,
>>> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the single
>>> offering we had for some kind
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> The *could* be the same thing,
>> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the single
>> offering we had for some kind of C&S WG I would cry. I hate it
>> because it is ridicul
On 10/28/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> The *could* be the same thing,
> except cloud-init is terrible and I hate it and if that was the single
> offering we had for some kind of C&S WG I would cry. I hate it
> because it is ridiculous to use in a non-cloud environment, and Server
> very much
On 10/28/2015 07:42 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Actually, I don't think that's true. Take a look at "fr1st p0st":
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2010-January/01.html
I stand, well sit, corrected. I was going off memory and wading through
the original wiki materials, which
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 03:03 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Could you provide a bit more context without necessarily offering your
>> suggestions? It's somewhat hard to discuss this without it going
>> everywhere without some kind of background into the o
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 06:08:13PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> There's a lot of history here - the Cloud group really started as a
> place to look at packaging OpenStack, OpenShift, Eucalyptus, CloudStack
> for Fedora. Then it evolved into cloud images and then a focus on Atomic.
Actually, I do
On 10/28/2015 03:03 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Could you provide a bit more context without necessarily offering your
> suggestions? It's somewhat hard to discuss this without it going
> everywhere without some kind of background into the overlaps or
> disparities that you see.
I can try to give som
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> During today's Cloud Working Group meeting we had a short but spirited
> discussion on the roles of the Cloud and Server Working Group and the
> editions we're producing.
>
> I wanted to open a discussion on that topic (see also
Hi all,
During today's Cloud Working Group meeting we had a short but spirited
discussion on the roles of the Cloud and Server Working Group and the
editions we're producing.
I wanted to open a discussion on that topic (see also [1]) ahead of
planning for F24 to see if the current setup makes sen
35 matches
Mail list logo