On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Fox, Kevin M <kevin....@pnnl.gov> wrote:
> Needing to fork templates to tweak things is a very common problem. > > Adding conditionals to Heat was discussed at the Summit. ( > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-heat-liberty-template-format). I > want to say, someone was going to prototype it using YAQL, but I don't > remember who. > I was going to do that, but I would not expect that ready in a very short time frame. It needs some investigation and agreement from others. I'd suggest making you decision based on what we have now. -Angus > > Would it be reasonable to keep if conditionals worked? > > Thanks, > Kevin > ________________________________________ > From: Hongbin Lu [hongbin...@huawei.com] > Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 3:01 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Continuing with heat-coe-templates > > Agree. The motivation of pulling templates out of Magnum tree is hoping > these templates can be leveraged by a larger community and get more > feedback. However, it is unlikely to be the case in practise, because > different people has their own version of templates for addressing > different use cases. It is proven to be hard to consolidate different > templates even if these templates share a large amount of duplicated code > (recall that we have to copy-and-paste the original template to add support > for Ironic and CoreOS). So, +1 for stopping usage of heat-coe-templates. > > Best regards, > Hongbin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Cammann [mailto:tom.camm...@hp.com] > Sent: June-29-15 11:16 AM > To: openstack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Continuing with heat-coe-templates > > Hello team, > > I've been doing work in Magnum recently to align our templates with the > "upstream" templates from larsks/heat-kubernetes[1]. I've also been porting > these changes to the stackforge/heat-coe-templates[2] repo. > > I'm currently not convinced that maintaining a separate repo for Magnum > templates (stackforge/heat-coe-templates) is beneficial for Magnum or the > community. > > Firstly it is very difficult to draw a line on what should be allowed into > the heat-coe-templates. We are currently taking out changes[3] that > introduced "useful" autoscaling capabilities in the templates but that > didn't fit the Magnum plan. If we are going to treat the heat-coe-templates > in that way then this extra repo will not allow organic development of new > and old container engine templates that are not tied into Magnum. > Another recent change[4] in development is smart autoscaling of bays which > introduces parameters that don't make a lot of sense outside of Magnum. > > There are also difficult interdependency problems between the templates > and the Magnum project such as the parameter fields. If a required > parameter is added into the template the Magnum code must be also updated > in the same commit to avoid functional test failures. This can be avoided > using "Depends-On: > #xxxxxx" > feature of gerrit, but it is an additional overhead and will require some > CI setup. > > Additionally we would have to version the templates, which I assume would > be necessary to allow for packaging. This brings with it is own problems. > > As far as I am aware there are no other people using the > heat-coe-templates beyond the Magnum team, if we want independent growth of > this repo it will need to be adopted by other people rather than Magnum > commiters. > > I don't see the heat templates as a dependency of Magnum, I see them as a > truly fundamental part of Magnum which is going to be very difficult to cut > out and make reusable without compromising Magnum's development process. > > I would propose to delete/deprecate the usage of heat-coe-templates and > continue with the usage of the templates in the Magnum repo. How does the > team feel about that? > > If we do continue with the large effort required to try and pull out the > templates as a dependency then we will need increase the visibility of repo > and greatly increase the reviews/commits on the repo. We also have a fairly > significant backlog of work to align the heat-coe-templates with the > templates in heat-coe-templates. > > Thanks, > Tom > > [1] https://github.com/larsks/heat-kubernetes > [2] https://github.com/stackforge/heat-coe-templates > [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/184687/ > [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/196505/ > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
