How about a LTS version (basically what 4.3 currently is) that undergoes longer testing and receives bugfix releases for a certain amount of time?
This is not a true proposal, just venting the idea. I'd even say that new features would have to be in one normal release before it's included in a LTS release. One drawback is that it most likely complicates release management. -- Erik On Tue Nov 25 2014 at 2:06:40 AM Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > Slightly pissed at the "switched to Openstack" remark. > Using Openstack as a means to "force/suggest" new features into ACS is > silly. I also want KVM snapshotting to happen, but I think there are more > important things to fix first. > > In my personal view, I wish ACS stopped completely development on new > features for a while and made the current features rock solid. > > I know we need new features to keep developers happy who would otherwise > slit their veins from boredom, but I personally do not care that much for > S3 compatibility or SDN or what not. When my deployment will be large > enough to need that I'll probably have enough money to develop them myself > (and contribute them back). > > Most people do not need FreeIPA or who knows what other bells and whistles. > I do like Openstack, I know & like some people involved with it and I > use(d) it (was even a mod on the RDO forum), but I don't want the bloody > kitchen sink in my servers. I want peace of mind and reliable services for > my customers who also don't give a rat's arse about said features; all they > want is their application or site to work 24/7. > > Personally I want everything that we have NOW fixed, polished; usage stats > working (with SG zones), proper backup and restore of volumes, security > groups finalised (hello IPv6, it's almost 2015!), no silly GUI mistakes or > typos in new releases and so on. > > Competing with Openstack head on is a dead end, stop chasing! Everybody > pushes all sorts of stuff into it which takes a lot of time, effort and > money to get working, if at all. > Average Joe will not use that in production, just like he won't use > Gentoo, Fedora or Archlinux in production, it sucks; you use battle tested > stuff like CentOS or Ubuntu LTS. > > For Average "IT manager" Joe to be capable of using Openstack in > production companies like Mirantis or eNovance need to take their time, > freeze it, slow it the fsck down, polish it, decide which features can't be > used actually (many, I bet!), package it in a sexy wrapping and then put it > up for sale (or download). > > Basically they'll have to build a Cloudstack. We're already there! Sort of > ... :-) > > /rant > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Outback Dingo" <outbackdi...@gmail.com> > > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > > Sent: Monday, 24 November, 2014 22:15:40 > > Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> On Nov 24, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Andrei Mikhailovsky <and...@arhont.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Yes, agree! Proper snapshotting is a must and an essential part of the > >> cloud in my world. Having this feature broken in KVM for many years is a > >> big blow to CloudStack in my opinion. > >> > > >> > I am already seeing on blogs and mailing lists people switching to > >> OpenStack because of this problem. > >> > > > > there are many aspects of which cloustack is loosing ground fast to > > openstack. Even Ive moved away from CS due to deficiencies such as the > NFS > > as secondary being required, vague support for open source SDN such as > > opendaylight, is another > > while CS is nice and quite easy to install, and get working, and being a > > big XEN fan, CS made it clean and simply to deploy, however, it does lack > > some of the higher end features and configuration aspects that are found > in > > openstack. Now while I > > also find openstack to be very KVM aligned, as it requires a client be > > installed on XEN, where CS doesnt, Openstack has moved well ahead in > > storage and networking options, not boxing me in to high cost commercial > > solutions. I will credit CS people > > for great support in the past years over IRC, though lately even that > seems > > waning, as as such there also seems to be more "commercial" support for > > openstack with the likes of mirantis, ibm, hp and others pushing turn key > > distros, open source some at that. > > I did love the simplicity of CS and XEN as a configuration, but felt the > > lacking in areas of "integration" with other technologies. Even openstack > > is working to integrate the freeIpa system, and opendaylight into the > > options, and it works well with ceph, gluster, > > and other storage systems. CS is simple, and in being that, they are > > loosing ground fast to the expansive capabilities openstack is offering > > with their latest release. I wish CS would expand their horizons a bit, > and > > not appear so short sighted and narrow minded > > when it came to its offerings and integration. I know if I was running > the > > product line currently I would be aligning CS with all the technologies > > becoming available, especially Software defined networking, and software > > defined storage. CS is great, but requires > > a larger feature set, more integration and further vision on trending > > technologies, yet it is just damn simple to install CS and XEN...... a > big > > win there for CS, though Fuel and Helion appear to be quickly closing > that > > gap. > > > > > > > >> > >> Can you send links, I am curious ! > >> > >> thxs > >> > >> > I hate to see people leaving CloudStack as I think it's fantastic > >> project and a really great community! > >> > > >> > Andrei > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > > >> >> From: "Andrija Panic" <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > >> >> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > >> >> Sent: Monday, 24 November, 2014 8:33:56 PM > >> >> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > >> > > >> >> So no CEPH support fot Xen, and no VM snapshot for KVM. > >> > > >> >> So, should I shoot my self with gun or with the pistol, that is the > >> >> question now :) > >> > > >> >> thx folks > >> > > >> >> On 24 November 2014 at 18:01, Adrian Lewis > >> >> <adr...@alsiconsulting.co.uk> > >> >> wrote: > >> > > >> >>> From what I've read there won’t be support for Ceph in Creedence > >> >>> (Xenserver > >> >>> 6.5) but it is on the cards for the following release (as should > >> >>> NFSv4 and > >> >>> a > >> >>> Centos 7 dom0). There's a blog post from Tim Mackey at: > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> http://xenserver.org/discuss-virtualization/virtualization- > blog/entry/beyond-creedence-xenserver-2015-planning.html > >> >>> > >> >>> and a Youtube video with a few updates here: > >> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JFUkEfpXaQ > >> >>> > >> >>> All looks promising but I'm impatient :-( > >> >>> > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > >> >>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] > >> >>> Sent: 24 November 2014 15:08 > >> >>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > >> >>> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > >> >>> > >> >>> THx Vadim - yes, I'm already using KVM with ceph for some time - > >> >>> works fine > >> >>> more or less :) thx > >> >>> > >> >>> On 24 November 2014 at 15:52, Vadim Kimlaychuk > >> >>> <vadim.kimlayc...@elion.ee> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> XenServer 6.5 (or 7.0) is not released yet. You can download > >> >>>> alpha of > >> >>>> next release and try it, but it is definately not for production. > >> >>>> I > >> >>>> haven't personally tried it because Cloudstack does not support > >> >>>> RBD > >> >>>> storage type for XenServer yet. So you are absolutely right -- > >> >>>> first > >> >>>> we need to wait for XenServer to release then we need to wait for > >> >>>> Cloudstack to implement those changes at backend. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I have used Ceph with KVM hypervisor for a short while. There > >> >>>> were > >> >>>> some points that I was not aware, but in general it worked well. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Vadim. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -----Original Message----- > >> >>>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] > >> >>>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 4:22 PM > >> >>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > >> >>>> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> HI Vadim, thanks for info. That is what I understood = but the > >> >>>> new > >> >>>> XenServer 6.5 or whatever the name, shoudl be using kernel 3.10.x > >> >>>> for > >> >>>> dom0, so I guess even after that is supported, we will need to > >> >>>> wait > >> >>>> some time for the CloudStack implementation on this ? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Thanks anyway > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On 24 November 2014 at 15:00, Vadim Kimlaychuk > >> >>>> <vadim.kimlayc...@elion.ee> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> Hi Andrija, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> For XenServer 6.2 it is not possible yet. Look for supported > >> >>>>> SR-s > >> >>>>> here: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> http://docs.vmd.citrix.com/XenServer/6.2.0/1.0/en_gb/reference.html#ck > >> >>>> _reference_storage_repository_types > >> >>>>> Somewhere in internet I saw information that RBD support is > >> >>>>> scheduled for the next major XenServer release. Can't find the > >> >>>>> link > >> >>>>> right away. > >> >>>>> The problem connected to Ceph + RBD as primary storage for > >> >>>>> XenServer is old dom0 kernel that does not allow RBD storage > >> >>>>> type. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Regards, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Vadim. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >> >>>>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] > >> >>>>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 2:06 PM > >> >>>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > >> >>>>> Subject: Xenserver and CEPH ? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Hi guys, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> anyone running ZenServer with CEPH as primary storage ? > >> >>>>> I read some info that there is support for CEPH inside > >> >>>>> XenServer > >> >>>>> from last year - but since I never actually tried this - thus > >> >>>>> the > >> >>>>> question. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Thanks, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Andrija Panić > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -- > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Andrija Panić > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> > >> >>> Andrija Panić > >> >>> > >> > > >> >> -- > >> > > >> >> Andrija Panić > >> >
