Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

I +1 for split the kolla-k8s repo, too. Here is the reason: 1. Kolla will be split into several repo in the future: kolla-docker, kolla-ansible. So if we use one repo for k8s, we will split it again. It will be more painful to do this. 2. Normally, the kolla-docker, kolla-ansible and

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Paul, Just to be clear, we are not putting master on pause for 4-6 weeks to split apart the repos to enable kubernetes development. The option on the table at this point are A) kolla repo as it exists today and empty repo for k8s B) kolla repo as it exists today with kubernetes integrated A

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Having read through the full thread I'm still in support of separate repos. I think the explanations Jeff Peeler and Adam Young have put forward summarise my thoughts very well. One of the main arguments I seem to be hearing for a single repo is Git tooling which I don't think is a good one;

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On 05/02/2016 05:53 PM, Jeff Peeler wrote: On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: On 05/02/2016 03:05 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: Swapnil, I gather this is what people want but this cannot be done with git and maintain history. To do this, we would have to

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

everyone) > >>and discuss why they are needed/reasonable. This should be done > >>regardless of if there are 1or 2 repo's in the end. > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Kevin > >> > >>From: Steven Dake (stdake) [st

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 7:07 AM Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am > morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate > repository. > > I don't think a separate repository is the correct

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Well, I don't think we should rely on ansible's config generation. We can't really as it's wired into ansible too much. jinja2 templates in Dockerfiles aren't connected to ansible in any way and are perfectly reusable. On 2 May 2016 at 16:13, Qiu Yu wrote: > On Mon, May 2,

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > Yup but that didn't happen with kolla-mesos and I didn't catch it until 2 > weeks after it was locked in stone. At that point I asked for the ABI to > be unified to which I got a "shrug" and no action. > > If it

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On 05/01/2016 05:03 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate repository. In Keystone, we are going to more and more repositories all the time. We started

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

>>From: Steven Dake (stdake) [std...@cisco.com] >>Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:14 AM >>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two >> &

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Peeler wrote: > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: >> I don't think a separate repository is the correct approach based upon one >> off private conversations with folks at summit. Many people from

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Jeff, What you propose is reasonable, but the timeline to make all that long term vision happen is time consuming and we want to get rolling now, not in t-4 to 6 weeks after we can sort out a kolla-docker and kolla-ansible split. FWIW It will make backporting a serious painful experience, and I

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

y of the work in the end going to be focused there? >>If most of the code ends up landing there, then its probably not worth >>splitting? >> >>Thanks, >>Kevin >> >>From: Steven Dake (stdake) [std...@cisco.com] >>Sent

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

__ > From: Steven Dake (stdake) [std...@cisco.com] > Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:14 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two > > I personally would like to see one set of def

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

From: Steven Dake (stdake) [std...@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:14 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two I personally would like to see one set of defaults files

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: > I don't think a separate repository is the correct approach based upon one > off private conversations with folks at summit. Many people from that list > approached me and indicated they would like to see the work

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

; >-Ryan > >- Original Message - >From: "Kevin M Fox" <kevin@pnnl.gov> >To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" ><openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 12:56:22 PM >Subject: Re: [ope

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

- From: "Kevin M Fox" <kevin@pnnl.gov> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 12:56:22 PM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two One thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two On 5/1/16, 10:32 PM, "Swapnil Kulkarni" <m...@coolsvap.net> wrote: >On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Britt Houser (bhouser) ><bhou...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Although it seems I'm in the minor

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 05/02/2016 03:05 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: >> Swapnil, >> >> I gather this is what people want but this cannot be done with git and >> maintain history. To do this, we would have to "cp oldrepo/files to >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

It seems for me that we have a dilemma between security (abstaining from creating a core group which may overuse their rights in kolla repo) and usability (not having multiple repos, which we experienced badly in the kolla-mesos era). I don't find the argument about having k8s ecosystem in

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

>I am in the favor of having two separate repos and evaluating the >merge/split option later. >Though in the longer run, I would recommend having a single repo with >multiple stable deployment tools(maybe too early to comment views but >yeah) > >Swapnil >Swapnil, >I gather this is what people

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

s)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate repository. I don't think a separate repos

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

t;Steven Dake (stdake)" <std...@cisco.com> >> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> Date: Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM >> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for u

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

lt;openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> Date: Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM >> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

for usage questions)" > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

ilto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Date: Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 5:03 PM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernete

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

I think merging 2 repos is possible with keeping a history. Tonyb also said that there will not be any issues with releasing z-streams. I recall we kinda made a decision on summit that we keep ansible in kolla tree as long as it's only stable deployment orchiestration tool, and when second one

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Steve, Thanks for bringing up this decision-making to the open forum. This is a tough decision. "us vs them" i am hoping will not happen this time around as we'll watch out for that. since there has been talk about ansible getting split out eventually, splitting k8s into a separate repo would be

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

><openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 5:03:57 PM >Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two > >Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am >morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

.openstack.org> > Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 5:03:57 PM > Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two > > Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am > morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate > rep

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

g List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 5:03:57 PM Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am morning we had asked folks if they wanted to parti

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two While I'm not on this list, I'll speak up anyways:) on summit we a

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

While I'm not on this list, I'll speak up anyways:) on summit we agreed that we start from separate repo, and after kolla-k8s becomes stable, we either merge or not merge. I'm for separate repo. On May 1, 2016 4:06 PM, "Steven Dake (stdake)" wrote: > Ryan had rightly pointed

[openstack-dev] [kolla][kubernetes] One repo vs two

Ryan had rightly pointed out that when we made the original proposal 9am morning we had asked folks if they wanted to participate in a separate repository. I don't think a separate repository is the correct approach based upon one off private conversations with folks at summit. Many people