On 20 August 2014 02:37, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: ... >> I'd like to see more unification of implementations in TripleO - but I >> still believe our basic principle of using OpenStack technologies that >> already exist in preference to third party ones is still sound, and >> offers substantial dogfood and virtuous circle benefits. > > > No doubt Triple-O serves a valuable dogfood and virtuous cycle purpose. > However, I would move that the Deployment Program should welcome the many > projects currently in the stackforge/ code namespace that do deployment of > OpenStack using traditional configuration management tools like Chef, > Puppet, and Ansible. It cannot be argued that these configuration management > systems are the de-facto way that OpenStack is deployed outside of HP, and > they belong in the Deployment Program, IMO.
I think you mean it 'can be argued'... ;). And I'd be happy if folk in those communities want to join in the deployment program and have code repositories in openstack/. To date, none have asked. > As a TC member, I would welcome someone from the Chef community proposing > the Chef cookbooks for inclusion in the Deployment program, to live under > the openstack/ code namespace. Same for the Puppet modules. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev