On 07/02/2018 03:31 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
On 28/06/18 15:09, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
* made the barrier to testing/development as low as 'curl
http://......minikube; minikube start' (this spurs adoption and
contribution)
That's not so different from devstack though.
* not having large silo's in deployment projects allowed better
communication on common tooling.
* Operator focused architecture, not project based architecture.
This simplifies the deployment situation greatly.
* try whenever possible to focus on just the commons and push vendor
specific needs to plugins so vendors can deal with vendor issues
directly and not corrupt the core.
I agree with all of those, but to be fair to OpenStack, you're leaving
out arguably the most important one:
* Installation instructions start with "assume a working datacenter"
They have that luxury; we do not. (To be clear, they are 100% right to
take full advantage of that luxury. Although if there are still folks
who go around saying that it's a trivial problem and OpenStackers must
all be idiots for making it look so difficult, they should really stop
embarrassing themselves.)
This.
There is nothing trivial about the creation of a working datacenter --
never mind a *well-running* datacenter. Comparing Kubernetes to
OpenStack -- particular OpenStack's lower levels -- is missing this
fundamental point and ends up comparing apples to oranges.
Best,
-jay
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
