I was typing quickly, maybe it was confusing, but nobody said we aim to *replace* fog at all. We were discussing decoupling from Fog API inside Foreman so we could enable writing non-Fog providers, which led to more opened topics like facets, smart-proxy communication or dynflow. This would be always complementary to fog.
Ivan pointed out well that RHEV v4 might not be good candidate for such an implementation because we will likely be backporting this, valid one. I just made these notes in case someone wants to take chance and start a patch or writing a RFE. On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Tomas Strachota <tstra...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Ivan Necas <ine...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Timo Goebel <m...@timogoebel.name> writes: >> >>>> On 22. May 2017, at 12:27, Ohad Levy <ohadl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Since we get a lot of lift from fog, especially for popular providers >>>> (e.g. ec2) IMHO its not a good idea to remove fog, which means that we >>>> balance between community contributions to fog (e.g. stuff we won't >>>> "enjoy" as we will not corporate) vs other benefits mentioned above. >>>> >>>> I for one, is not convinced the effort to not run with fog is less work >>>> then adding / updating a fog provider. >>>> >>>> Ohad >>> >>> I do agree with Ohad here. I'd focus on improving the fog-providers and not >>> trying to reinvent the weel. >>> I think, "cloud" topics like focussing on real server orchestration (think >>> hostgroup as an auto scaling group) adds more benefits for a user. A user >>> usually doesn't care about the library used. Using foreman as a tool to >>> setup a cloud or container environment on bare metal does add value. >>> >>> Fog doesn't do any network orchestration, yet. If we add this (e.g. >>> provision a vlan on a switchport or some SDN), that would be a valid >>> point imho to switch the library. >> >> >> I think what's missing is not well-defined layer between Foreman and >> Fog, and we perhaps over-use the Fog as the unification layer. >> >> I feel quite a lot of risk in connecting the migration between oVirt v3 >> vs. v4 with introduction of new layer into the Foreman to serve better >> for our purposes, that would not use the Fog. Especially when the APIv4 >> is pretty close. >> >> If we make fog oVirt provider use APIv4, we still have chance that the >> code will be used outside of Foreman, that will make the implementation >> better: from the past - did we experience this happening in oVirt or >> other providers? (my feeling is that they did, but not monitoring that >> that much) >> >> Long story short: >> >> 1. I agree we should not expose Fog as THE layer we use in the UI/API, >> to add the entry points that are interesting for use but not for fog >> that much > > +1 for adding a layer between our UI/API and fog or potentially some > other library we might decide to use (or write) in future. I think > it's an important step, regardless of whether we decide to use fog for > oVirt v4 api or not. > >> >> 2. we should continue with fog-ovirt to use APIv4 >> >> Even though it looks compelling to connecting this two, I would rather >> take it independent steps. >> >> -- Ivan >> >>> >>> - Timo >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "foreman-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "foreman-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Later, Lukas @lzap Zapletal -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
