I agree with you and Qiming. The Higgins project should start with basic functionalities and revisit advanced features later.
Best regards, Hongbin From: Yanyan Hu [mailto:huyanya...@gmail.com] Sent: May-24-16 11:06 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [higgins] Continued discussion from the last team meeting Hi, Hongbing, thanks a lot for the summary! The following is my thoughts on those two questions left: About container composition, it is a really useful and important feature for enduser. But based on my understanding, user can actually achieve the same goal by leveraging other high level OpenStack services, e.g. defining a Heat template with Higgins container resources and app/service (softwareconfig/softwaredeployment resources) running inside containers. In future we can implement related functionality inside Higgins to better support this kind of use cases natively. But in current stage, I suggest we focus on container primitive and its basic operations. For container host management, I agree we should expose related API interfaces to operator(admin). Ideally, Higgins should be able to manage all container hosts(baremetal and VM) automatically, but manual intervention could be necessary in many pratical use cases. But I suggest to hide these API interfaces from endusers since it's not their responsibility to manage those hosts. Thanks. 2016-05-25 4:55 GMT+08:00 Hongbin Lu <hongbin...@huawei.com<mailto:hongbin...@huawei.com>>: Hi all, At the last team meeting, we tried to define the scope of the Higgins project. In general, we agreed to focus on the following features as an initial start: • Build a container abstraction and use docker as the first implementation. • Focus on basic container operations (i.e. CRUD), and leave advanced operations (i.e. keep container alive, rolling upgrade, etc.) to users or other projects/services. • Start with non-nested container use cases (e.g. containers on physical hosts), and revisit nested container use cases (e.g. containers on VMs) later. The items below needs further discussion so I started this ML to discuss it. 1. Container composition: implement a docker compose like feature 2. Container host management: abstract container host For #1, it seems we broadly agreed that this is a useful feature. The argument is where this feature belongs to. Some people think this feature belongs to other projects, such as Heat, and others think it belongs to Higgins so we should implement it. For #2, we were mainly debating two things: where the container hosts come from (provisioned by Nova or provided by operators); should we expose host management APIs to end-users? Thoughts? Best regards, Hongbin __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Best regards, Yanyan
__________________________________________________________________________ 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