On 13/12/13 16:20 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 12 December 2013 21:59, Jaromir Coufal <jcou...@redhat.com> wrote:On 2013/12/12 01:21, Robert Collins wrote:Avoiding cloud - ack. However, on instance - 'instance' is a very well defined term in Nova and thus OpenStack: Nova boot gets you an instance, nova delete gets rid of an instance, nova rebuild recreates it, etc. Instances run [virtual|baremetal] machines managed by a hypervisor. So nova-scheduler is not ever going to be confused with instance in the OpenStack space IMO. But it brings up a broader question, which is - what should we do when terms that are well defined in OpenStack - like Node, Instance, Flavor - are not so well defined for new users? We could use different terms, but that may confuse 'stackers, and will mean that our UI needs it's own dedicated terminology to map back to e.g. the manuals for Nova and Ironic. I'm inclined to suggest that as a principle, where there is a well defined OpenStack concept, that we use it, even if it is not ideal, because the consistency will be valuable.
I think this is a really important point. I think the consistency is a powerful tool for teaching new users how they should expect tripleo/tuskar to work and should lessen the learning curve, as long they've used openstack before. -- Jordan O'Mara <jomara at redhat.com>Red Hat Engineering, Raleigh
pgpvsMEMEL94Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
