osdir.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[tc] [ironic] Promoting ironic to a top-level opendev project?



On 16.04.20 10:30, Mark Goddard wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 16:39, Donny Davis <donny at fortnebula.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:17 AM Matthew Treinish <mtreinish at kortar.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 12:12:08PM +0100, Sean Mooney wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 01:17 +0000, Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com wrote:
>>>>> This is specific to https://www.openstack.org/marketplace/distros/ and private clouds.
>>>> sometime as a comunity we are such trolls
>>>> https://www.openstack.org/marketplace/distros/distribution/devstack/ds-openstack
>>>> i love that devstack is listed there.
>>>> although given how long it took use to stop people running in production i guess it
>>>> qualifies as it had market usage.
>>>
>>> This actually isn't devstack the development tool, it is a company named
>>> Devstack that is an OpenStack vendor (not confusing at all :p). Their website is:
>>>
>>> http://www.devstack.co.kr
>>>
>>> I hope they're not basing their offerings on devstack the tool, but I have no
>>> idea.
>>>
>>> -Matt Treinish
>>>
>>>>> We have trademarks for Compute, storage, and for Full openstack.
>>>>> We can add trademark for baremetal for distros to market based on trademarks.
>>>>> It will be interesting if we can make that trademark of Open Infrastructure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Arkady
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Julia Kreger <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:37 PM
>>>>> To: Kanevsky, Arkady
>>>>> Cc: Sean Mooney; Dmitry Tantsur; openstack-discuss
>>>>> Subject: Re: [tc] [ironic] Promoting ironic to a top-level opendev project?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:04 PM <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good Point Sean.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that lead to OpenStack powered BareMetal trademark?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not entirely sure where your thought process is going. Could you elaborate a little on what your thinking?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Sean Mooney <smooney at redhat.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 5:38 AM
>>>>>> To: Dmitry Tantsur; openstack-discuss
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [tc] [ironic] Promoting ironic to a top-level opendev project?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 2020-04-14 at 11:45 +0200, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 7:26 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2020-04-08 10:04:25 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 4:37 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>> Why *can't* OpenShift include OpenStack projects? I haven't
>>>>>>>>>> seen this adequately explained.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's less of a technical issue, but more of misunderstanding
>>>>>>>>> that including an OpenStack project does not involve literally
>>>>>>>>> installing OpenStack. And no matter what we think, for a lot of
>>>>>>>>> people OpenStack==Nova (another marketing issue to address?).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't understand why that would make a difference in this case,
>>>>>>>> unless you're saying that the people who make architectural
>>>>>>>> decisions about what's included in OpenShift have no actual
>>>>>>>> familiarity with Ironic and OpenStack. If you know anyone who
>>>>>>>> works at that company, can you help them understand the difference?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's de-focus on OpenShift please. People who just need a bare
>>>>>>> metal management solution don't need to understand what OpenStack
>>>>>>> is. What would they assume from a quick search? The first link I've
>>>>>>> got by googling in a private window is our web site with:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OpenStack software controls large pools of compute, storage, and
>>>>>>> networking resources throughout a datacenter, managed through a
>>>>>>> dashboard or via the OpenStack API. OpenStack works with popular
>>>>>>> enterprise and open source technologies making it ideal for heterogeneous infrastructure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is it so unexpected they assume Ironic needs virtual machines to operate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> yes since that at no point mentions viurtual machines.
>>>>>> openstack is not a vm managment system.
>>>>>> even in the early days form diablo or essex openstack cloud manage baremetal computes as well as contaienr via
>>>>>> openvz and lxc then nova docker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> kubernetes is trying to redifine anything that is not contaienr native as not cloud but the compute context
>>>>>> (container, vm or baremetal) provided by a cloud system is an implementation detail. the phrase "OpenStack software
>>>>>> controls large pools of compute" does not imply vm any more then "ironic implies ipmi".  ipmi is an important
>>>>>> protocol in ironic and many of the vendor driver just ipmi with extentions but ironic does not directly imply it and
>>>>>> openstack does not directly imply vms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i admit there has been some misteps in this regard in terms of
>>>>>> openstack powered programe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> specificly the "OpenStack Powered Compute" trademark
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the fact it specificaly requires nova as the requirement is actully
>>>>>> the compute api
>>>>>> https://opendev.org/openstack/interop/src/branch/master/2018.02.json#L
>>>>>> 100-L193 can be consuing to some but it does not require the use of
>>>>>> virtual machine dirver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the only requiremetn the list that cannot be achive with ironic today is compute-servers-resize.
>>>>>> if the ironic node was pxe booted form a cinder volume resize would actully be doable in a diskless baremetal server
>>>>>> scech as a blade or a rsd system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if you look at the apiu requriement objectivly it really only requires that the api exsits to create an instance but
>>>>>> does not state way tthat instance is. it could be an lxc contaienr or any other virt dirver that fullfuils the api
>>>>>> requirements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it would have been nice if this branding treated ironic and now zun i guess as first class citizens but i think that
>>>>>> is an an artifict of the the fact the requiremetn are defiend in terms of api.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> compute-servers-create dose not mean create a vm even if that is what will happen most of the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On one hand, large distributions want us to have stable branches
>>>>>>>>> every year or two. Even what we have is too much.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On the other - we have small consumers who could benefit from
>>>>>>>>> just pulling the latest(ish) release and knowing that if a
>>>>>>>>> serous bug is found there, they won't have to update to the next
>>>>>>>>> feature (and potentially major) release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This sounds like a problem shared by, well, basically every other
>>>>>>>> project in OpenStack too. Perhaps it's an opportunity to
>>>>>>>> collaborate on finding solutions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1000 although I'm not sure if all projects are interested in
>>>>>>> +intermediate
>>>>>>> releases. Given how many follow the cycle-with-rc model, I doubt it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dmitry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jeremy Stanley
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> I know I am probably going to be lit on fire for this... but anyways here goes it.
>>
>> Why does anyone care if ironic wants to move to a top level project or not?
>> I would think the leaders of this project are most involved in the needs
>> of what it's going to take for continued success. If the team that is doing
>> the heavy lifting wants something, then I feel it's our position to enable
>> success. It looks a lot to me like this is what the people who work on the
>> project want (and if you don't have that data maybe poll your own team),
>>
>> So why the push back?
>>
>> The resources we do have are clearly dwindling - lets not give people
>> any more reasons to leave if we can avoid it. Happiness in what you
>> do and where you do it is a thing.
>>
>> If Ironic wants to move, and it's not damaging to other projects. I think
>> we should make that as easy as possible. All the rest seems like a bunch
>> of noise.
>>
>> /donnyd cowers in the corner waiting for blunt objects to be thrown
> 
> Well let's not assume that there is consensus even within the ironic
> team on this. The last time we discussed it between cores there was no
> unanimous decision. I see the problems of perception that this is
> trying to solve, but I suspect that the technical difference between
> being a top level OSF project vs. an OpenStack project will be lost on
> most who have already made up their minds. Not least because it's the
> *OpenStack* foundation!

There is probably very little we can do about the ones who have made up 
their minds already or the ones who make up their minds because of
the governing foundation (in practice, I'd think/hope very few do).

I think the proposal is more to do something about the ones who are 
looking for a bare metal management/provisioning/lifecycle solution now,
but move on to other places as it is not immediately obvious to them
that Ironic does not necessarily need the additional complexity of a 
full OpenStack deployment.

> I'd like to see us fix some of the pain points
> mentioned within the community before jumping out (if necessary).
> 
> The fact that metal3 and other projects are using Ironic will only
> help to strengthen Ironic's image outside of OpenStack, and if it
> means the metal3 marketing team has to do a bit of work to say "yes
> we're using an OpenStack project, and we're proud of that", then
> that's fine by me.
> 
>> --
>> ~/DonnyD
>> C: 805 814 6800
>> "No mission too difficult. No sacrifice too great. Duty First"
>