On 29/10/14 15:30 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:
Yes, the aim is to get a vagrant-openstack provider plugin under Hashicorp's or
Mitchellh's github account. Whether you call that "official" or "blessed",
doesn't really matter.

In order for Vagrant to integrate with other tools such as Packer there needs
to be a preferred plugin. Hopefully the owners of the other plugins will agree
to deprecate theirs so that an end can be put to the fragmentation that has
happened so far and direct contributors to the correct place. 

FWIW, I'm happy to deprecate mine!

Flavio



On 29 October 2014 10:04, Flavio Percoco <[email protected]> wrote:

   On 28/10/14 21:23 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:

       Hi all,

       In preparation of the OpenStack Summit in Paris next week, I'm hoping
       to speak
       to some people in the OpenStack foundation about the benefits of a
       partnership
       with Hashicorp, who make fantastic tools like Vagrant and Packer (and
       others).

       As a n00b aspiring to become an OpenStack contributor, the variety of
       Vagrant
       devstack environments is pretty overwhelming. It appears to me that it
       really
       depends on what project you are contributing to, which denotes which
       devstack
       you should use. The ones I have tried take a long time (45 mins+) to
       provision
       from scratch. 

       One aspect which I am acutely aware of is developer productivity and 45
       minutes
       is a lot of time. Packer was designed to help alleviate bottleneck, and
       Vagrantcloud has inbuilt support for the versioning of Vagrant boxes.
       It would
       be a pretty straight forward exercise to use Packer to do a daily (or
       however
       often) build of a devstack box and upload it to Vagrantcloud for
       developers to
       download. With a decent internet connection that time would be
       significantly
       less than 45 minutes.

       I would really like to think that this community should also be able to
       come to
       a consensus over what to include in a "standard" devstack. That there
       currently
       seems to be many different flavours cannot help with issues of
       fragmentation
       between so many different moving parts to build an OpenStack
       environment.

       Another big issue that I hope to address with the foundation, is the
       integration of Hashicorp's tools with OpenStack. 

       The various Vagrant plugins to add OpenStack as a provider is a mess.
       There is
       one specific for Rackspace who have a different Keystone API, and at
       least 3
       others for the vanilla OpenStack:
       https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant-rackspace
       https://github.com/ggiamarchi/vagrant-openstack-provider
       https://github.com/cloudbau/vagrant-openstack-plugin
       https://github.com/FlaPer87/vagrant-openstack


   I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even work any more, I don't even know
   ruby ;)

   I do see a value in having a vagrant-openstack provider but I don't
   think we should pick one and mark it as blessed. We're trying very
   hard to move away from 'blessing' projecs, at the very least depend
   less on it.

   Anyone should feel free to create the provider on stackforge and
   maintain it. What would be even better is to have Hashicorp itself
   creating and maintaining this provider.

   Cheers,
   Flavio



       The significance of not having an "official" provider, for one example,
       is when
       you use Packer to build an image in OpenStack and try to post-process
       it into a
       Vagrant box, it bombs with this error:


          ==> openstack: Running post-processor: vagrant
          Build 'openstack' errored: 1 error(s) occurred:

          * Post-processor failed: Unknown artifact type, can't build box:
          mitchellh.openstack


       Because Packer doesn't know what Vagrant expects the provider to be, as
       explained here.

       In my opinion this a pretty big issue holding back the wider acceptance
       of
       OpenStack. When I am at a customer and introduce them to tools like
       Vagrant and
       Packer and how well they work with AWS, I still avoid the conversation
       about
       OpenStack when I would really love to put them on our (Elastx's) public
       cloud.

       What say you? Could I get a +1 from those who see this as a worthwhile
       issue?

       Cheers,

       Phil.
       --
       Philip Cheong
       Elastx | Public and Private PaaS
       email: [email protected]
       office: +46 8 557 728 10
       mobile: +46 702 870 814
       twitter: @Elastx
       http://elastx.se


       _______________________________________________
       OpenStack-dev mailing list
       [email protected]
       http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
   --
   @flaper87
   Flavio Percoco
_______________________________________________
   OpenStack-dev mailing list
   [email protected]
   http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev





--
Philip Cheong
Elastx | Public and Private PaaS
email: [email protected]
office: +46 8 557 728 10
mobile: +46 702 870 814
twitter: @Elastx
http://elastx.se

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

Attachment: pgpRbIUY4BxBT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to