>My observation has been that Murano has changed from a Windows focused Deployment Service >to a Metadata Application Catalog Workflow thing (I fully admit this may be an invalid >observation). It's unclear to me what OpenStack pain/use-cases is to be solved by "complex >object composition, description of data types, contracts..."
Murano is intended to provide high level definition of Applications which will include description of specific application requirements (like input parameters, external dependencies) as well as low level scripts, heat snippets and workflows which will be required to manage application. Object composition is required to address application diversity. We expect to be an integration layer for numerous different application from different OS and areas like WebServices, BigData, SAP, Enterprise specific apps. In order to decrease amount of work for Application author we will provide a way to reuse existing applications by extending them via object composition. Inside Murano we provide a library of workflows and requirements for general application classes. This library has workflows for instance creation, networking and app deployments. This will help application author to write only application specific stuff. For example if I need to publish my web service based on Tomcat I will create a new application class which has tomcat as a parent and then I will add my application specific parameters like App URL and will add deployment script which will download App war file and put it to Tomcat app directory. All other stuff will be done automatically by existing workflows for tomcat application. You can imagine this as a nested Heat template inclusion but with ability to override and\or extend it. The ability to add a workflow actually looks like a dynamic Heat resource type generation as you can specify actions and associated workflows. These actions can be triggered by external events to provide an ability of application life cycle management. Thanks Georgy On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Keith Bray <keith.b...@rackspace.com>wrote: > > Can someone elaborate further on the things that Murano is intended to > solve within the OpenStack ecosystem? My observation has been that Murano > has changed from a Windows focused Deployment Service to a Metadata > Application Catalog Workflow thing (I fully admit this may be an invalid > observation). It's unclear to me what OpenStack pain/use-cases is to be > solved by "complex object composition, description of data types, > contracts..." > > Your thoughts would be much appreciated. > > Thanks, > -Keith > > From: Renat Akhmerov <rakhme...@mirantis.com> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: Monday, February 17, 2014 1:33 AM > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Murano] Need a new DSL for Murano > > Clint, > > We're collaborating with Murano. We may need to do it in a way that > others could see it though. There are several things here: > > - Murano doesn't really have a "workflow engine" similar to Mistral's. > People get confused with that but it's just a legacy terminology, I think > Murano folks were going to rename this component to be more precise about > it. > - Mistral DSL doesn't seem to be a good option for solving tasks that > Murano is intended to solve. Specifically I mean things like complex object > composition, description of data types, contracts and so on. Like Alex and > Stan mentioned Murano DSL tends to grow into a full programming language > . > - Most likely Mistral will be used in Murano for implementation, at > least we see where it would be valuable. But Mistral is not so matured yet, > we need to keep working hard and be patient :) > > > Anyway, we keep thinking on how to make both languages look similar or > at least the possibility to use them seamlessly, if needed (call Mistral > workflows from Murano DSL or vice versa). > > Renat Akhmerov > @ Mirantis Inc. > > On 16 Feb 2014, at 05:48, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Alexander Tivelkov's message of 2014-02-14 18:17:10 -0800: > > Hi folks, > > Murano matures, and we are getting more and more feedback from our early > adopters. The overall reception is very positive, but at the same time > there are some complaints as well. By now the most significant complaint is > is hard to write workflows for application deployment and maintenance. > > Current version of workflow definition markup really have some design > drawbacks which limit its potential adoption. They are caused by the fact > that it was never intended for use for Application Catalog use-cases. > > > Just curious, is there any reason you're not collaborating on Mistral > for this rather than both having a workflow engine? > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- Georgy Okrokvertskhov Architect, OpenStack Platform Products, Mirantis http://www.mirantis.com Tel. +1 650 963 9828 Mob. +1 650 996 3284
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev