Excerpts from Giulio Fidente's message of 2015-04-17 06:21:28 -0700: > Hi, > > the Heat/Puppet implementation of the Overcloud deployment seems to be > surpassing in features the Heat/Elements implementation. > > The changes for Ceph are an example, the Puppet based version is already > adding features which don't have they counterpart into Elements based. > > Recently we started working on the addition of Pacemaker into the > Overcloud, to monitor the services and provide a number of 'auto > healing' features, and again this is happening in the Puppet > implementation only (at least for now) so I think the gap will become > bigger. > > Given we support different implementations with a single top-level > template [1], to keep other templates valid we're forced to propagate > the params into the Elements based templates as well, even though there > is no use for these there, see for example [2]. > > The extra work itself is not of great concern but I wonder if it > wouldn't make sense to deprecate the Elements based templates at this > point, instead of keep adding there unused parts? Thoughts? >
In a perfect world, templates wouldn't have implementation details like puppet-anything in them. We all know that isn't true, but in a perfect world.. ;) I was just wondering the other day if anybody is relying on the non-puppet jobs anymore. I think from my view of things, the "elements" approach can be deprecated and removed if nobody steps up to maintain them. __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
