On 05/24/2016 12:51 PM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
Hi there, I wanted quickly wanted to get some feedback on a design decision regarding vagrant-service-manager. According to my understanding, vagrant-service-manager "is designed to enable easier access to the features and services provided by the Atomic Developer Bundle (ADB)." At least that is also the objective from the README. The question is around the term "services". In the context of vagrant-service-manager services are docker, openshift, kubernete, (mesos). The higher level components we are managing for the user to use the ADB/CDK. These might be system services (systemd), but they also might be just a bunch of running Docker containers. There is an outstanding pull request [1] for vagrant-service-manager which adds a start/stop to the already existing 'vagrant service-manager restart <service>'. Adding start/stop makes sense, but as a side effect it also allows and documents that now any systemd service can be controlled via 'vagrant service-manager [start|stop|restart] <service>'. This is the part I am not so happy about. I think we go too far in this case on what the vagrant-service-manager can and should do. It is not its responsibility to control systemd services.
I believe part of the motivation for this methodology is to avoid having to write service modules for things that systemd already manages. However, I can understand where this has perhaps gotten to generalized. There is an existing Issue around docs for developers on how to add new services to vagrant-service-manager.
One option would be to leave the full access to systemd undocumented. I can see minor value in it, but understand that it may not be useful and therefore is just more potential for things to go sideways. The value is that others can now use this code when they want to control simple aspects of a VM in an accessible way.
I am also concerned that the term 'service' gets now overloaded in the context of the plugin. Once meaning systemd service once functional service as provided by ADB/CDK to fulfill container based tasks. I am interested to hear what others thing in this regard or whether I stand alone with my concerns.
How do you view supporting services? If Orchestrator X has an optional component, how should that be managed?
regards, bex _______________________________________________ Container-tools mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/container-tools
