Excerpts from Robert Collins's message of 2013-08-27 14:13:37 -0700: > On 28 August 2013 06:54, Steven Hardy <[email protected]> wrote: > > We had some recent discussions regarding the Heat mission statement and > > came up with: > > > > "To explicitly model the relationships between OpenStack resources of all > > kinds; and to harness those models, expressed in forms accessible to both > > humans and machines, to manage infrastructure resources throughout the > > lifecycle of applications." > > Bingo! > > > The ideas, iterations and some discussion is captured in this etherpad: > > > > https://etherpad.openstack.org/heat-mission > > > > If anyone has any remaining comments, please speak now, but I think most of > > those involved in the discussion thus-far have reached the point of wishing > > to declare it final ;) > > I think there is some confusion about implementation vs intent here > :). Or at least I hope so. I wouldn't expect Nova's mission statement > to talk about 'modelling virtual machines' : modelling is internal > jargon, not a mission! > > What you want, IMO, is for a moderately technical sysadmin to read the > mission statement and go 'hell yeahs, I want to use Heat'. > > "Create a human and machine accessible service for managing the entire > lifecycle of infrastructure and applications within OpenStack clouds." >
Reading the two next to eachother, this evoked The Emperor's New Groove for me. "Why do we even have that lever?" Robert this encapsulates what I think of Heat perfectly. +1 from me. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
