Oh, another thing I meant to mention, as your FS talks about containers - there is support for working with containers with Brooklyn in the Apache 2.0 licensed project "Clocker" [1], [2]. That means you can use it with Brooklyn to create a fully wired-together Kubernetes cluster or Docker Swarm.
Also there's work ongoing at the moment [3] to open-source the code that will then let you use Brooklyn to deploy apps directly on to those containers. So *that* would mean you could take your hosts and do a single deployment on them of Cloudstack (with included Brooklyn+Clocker) and run up a full stack on which you can promptly deploy fully whole-lifecycle-managed apps to VM or container. Not bad! [1] https://github.com/brooklyncentral/clocker [2] http://www.clocker.io/ [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/35dafdf79671c9c749a9002cbf6d0c9d910ceb8a074623575e2d598d@%3Cdev.brooklyn.apache.org%3E On Tue, 30 May 2017 at 14:34 Daan Hoogland <[email protected]> wrote: > By all means, and thanks to you all for sharing my viewpoint on this > integration. Basically, I think my FS is at fault in that it tries to do > things that Brooklyn already does for me, so it really needs work … this is > fun ;) please comment on my FS in the wiki or here, as you like. > > > > > Senior Software Developer > [email protected] > www.shapeblue.com > > > > > > > > *From: *Geoff Macartney <[email protected]> > *Date: *Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 15:24 > > > *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Cc: *Daan Hoogland <[email protected]> > *Subject: *Re: ApplicationClusters > > If you like I could expand a bit on the correspondence, as I see it, > between the requirements in your FS and the things that Brooklyn already > does? >
