On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:33:20 AM UTC-4, Michael DeHaan wrote: > > Right, I'm saying this isn't sustainable or a good approach for most > infrastructures - and while it may be fine for you I want to avoid steering > people down that path as it has all the perils of "manual cloud" circa > 2005-ish. >
For continued sanity of all involved I'd agree that avoiding manual cloud partitioning is strongly recommended. It is ok for small experiments, and not much more than that. As I was discussing with Paul Durivage yesterday, fleetd in CoreOS actually > does provide this functionality too -- I was thinking more WRT the CoreOS > base image solving a different problem. > > So having a module that allows Ansible to tell CoreOS "I want X instances > of this image" would be pretty neat to see. Submissions welcome! > I've been trying to work out how to leverage both Ansible and Docker containers (may they be hosted using CoreOS, Project Atomic, Shipper...I really don't care which at this point so long as it won't set the datacenter on fire or something) going forward. My current thinking has the existing docker module used as a system for building container images pushed to a local registry. Something else (fleet, geard, mesos, Shipper's gadget) manages the placement of containers onto hosts, after Ansible tells it what to do. (Everyone sails off happily into the sunset...) That's my highly idealistic vision anyway. We'll see what happens. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ansible Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/9a025224-1ae1-4eac-9d83-30ff4b1cdbca%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
