Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance
Might be a good option to plug in to the kubernetes cluster api https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api too. Thanks, Kevin From: Mark Goddard [m...@stackhpc.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 10:55 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance +1. I like it. Could also be a good fit for Kayobe's undercloud equivalent at some point. On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 18:51, Jim Rollenhagen mailto:j...@jimrollenhagen.com>> wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Dmitry Tantsur mailto:dtant...@redhat.com>> wrote: Hi all, I would like propose the metalsmith library [1][2] for inclusion into the bare metal project governance. What it is and is not - Metalsmith is a library and CLI tool for using Ironic+Neutron for provisioning bare metal nodes. It can be seen as a lightweight replacement of Nova when Nova is too much. The primary use case is single-tenant standalone installer. Metalsmith is not a new service, it does not maintain any state, except for state maintained by Ironic and Neutron. Metalsmith is not and will not be a replacement for Nova in any proper cloud scenario. Metalsmith does have some overlap with Bifrost, with one important feature difference: its primary feature is a mini-scheduler that allows to pick a suitable bare metal node for deployment. I have a partial convergence plan as well! First, as part of this effort I'm working on missing features in openstacksdk, which is used in the OpenStack ansible modules, which are used in Bifrost. Second, I hope we can use it as a helper for making Bifrost do scheduling decisions. Background -- Metalsmith was born with the goal of replacing Nova in TripleO undercloud. Indeed, the undercloud uses only a small subset of Nova features, while having features that conflict with Nova's design (for example, bypassing the scheduler [3]). We wanted to avoid putting a lot of provisioning logic into existing TripleO components. So I wrote a library that does not carry any TripleO-specific assumptions, but does allow to address its needs. Why under Ironic I believe the goal of Metalsmith is fully aligned with what the Ironic team is doing around standalone deployment. I think Metalsmith can provide a nice entry point into standalone deployments for people who (for any reasons) will not use Bifrost. With this change I hope to get more exposure for it. The library itself is small, documented [2], follows OpenStack practices and does not have particular operating requirements. There is nothing in it that is not familiar to the Ironic team members. I agree with all of this, after reading the code/docs. +1 from me. // jim Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Dmitry [1] https://github.com/openstack/metalsmith [2] https://metalsmith.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ [3] http://tripleo.org/install/advanced_deployment/node_placement.html __ 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 __ 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 __ 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance
+1. I like it. Could also be a good fit for Kayobe's undercloud equivalent at some point. On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 18:51, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Dmitry Tantsur > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I would like propose the metalsmith library [1][2] for inclusion into the >> bare metal project governance. >> >> What it is and is not >> - >> >> Metalsmith is a library and CLI tool for using Ironic+Neutron for >> provisioning bare metal nodes. It can be seen as a lightweight replacement >> of Nova when Nova is too much. The primary use case is single-tenant >> standalone installer. >> >> Metalsmith is not a new service, it does not maintain any state, except >> for state maintained by Ironic and Neutron. Metalsmith is not and will not >> be a replacement for Nova in any proper cloud scenario. >> >> Metalsmith does have some overlap with Bifrost, with one important >> feature difference: its primary feature is a mini-scheduler that allows to >> pick a suitable bare metal node for deployment. >> >> I have a partial convergence plan as well! First, as part of this effort >> I'm working on missing features in openstacksdk, which is used in the >> OpenStack ansible modules, which are used in Bifrost. Second, I hope we can >> use it as a helper for making Bifrost do scheduling decisions. >> >> Background >> -- >> >> Metalsmith was born with the goal of replacing Nova in TripleO >> undercloud. Indeed, the undercloud uses only a small subset of Nova >> features, while having features that conflict with Nova's design (for >> example, bypassing the scheduler [3]). >> >> We wanted to avoid putting a lot of provisioning logic into existing >> TripleO components. So I wrote a library that does not carry any >> TripleO-specific assumptions, but does allow to address its needs. >> >> Why under Ironic >> >> >> I believe the goal of Metalsmith is fully aligned with what the Ironic >> team is doing around standalone deployment. I think Metalsmith can provide >> a nice entry point into standalone deployments for people who (for any >> reasons) will not use Bifrost. With this change I hope to get more exposure >> for it. >> >> The library itself is small, documented [2], follows OpenStack practices >> and does not have particular operating requirements. There is nothing in it >> that is not familiar to the Ironic team members. >> > > I agree with all of this, after reading the code/docs. +1 from me. > > // jim > > >> >> Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. >> >> Dmitry >> >> >> [1] https://github.com/openstack/metalsmith >> [2] https://metalsmith.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ >> [3] http://tripleo.org/install/advanced_deployment/node_placement.html >> >> __ >> 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like propose the metalsmith library [1][2] for inclusion into the > bare metal project governance. > > What it is and is not > - > > Metalsmith is a library and CLI tool for using Ironic+Neutron for > provisioning bare metal nodes. It can be seen as a lightweight replacement > of Nova when Nova is too much. The primary use case is single-tenant > standalone installer. > > Metalsmith is not a new service, it does not maintain any state, except > for state maintained by Ironic and Neutron. Metalsmith is not and will not > be a replacement for Nova in any proper cloud scenario. > > Metalsmith does have some overlap with Bifrost, with one important feature > difference: its primary feature is a mini-scheduler that allows to pick a > suitable bare metal node for deployment. > > I have a partial convergence plan as well! First, as part of this effort > I'm working on missing features in openstacksdk, which is used in the > OpenStack ansible modules, which are used in Bifrost. Second, I hope we can > use it as a helper for making Bifrost do scheduling decisions. > > Background > -- > > Metalsmith was born with the goal of replacing Nova in TripleO undercloud. > Indeed, the undercloud uses only a small subset of Nova features, while > having features that conflict with Nova's design (for example, bypassing > the scheduler [3]). > > We wanted to avoid putting a lot of provisioning logic into existing > TripleO components. So I wrote a library that does not carry any > TripleO-specific assumptions, but does allow to address its needs. > > Why under Ironic > > > I believe the goal of Metalsmith is fully aligned with what the Ironic > team is doing around standalone deployment. I think Metalsmith can provide > a nice entry point into standalone deployments for people who (for any > reasons) will not use Bifrost. With this change I hope to get more exposure > for it. > > The library itself is small, documented [2], follows OpenStack practices > and does not have particular operating requirements. There is nothing in it > that is not familiar to the Ironic team members. > I agree with all of this, after reading the code/docs. +1 from me. // jim > > Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. > > Dmitry > > > [1] https://github.com/openstack/metalsmith > [2] https://metalsmith.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ > [3] http://tripleo.org/install/advanced_deployment/node_placement.html > > __ > 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
Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 9:09 AM Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > I would like propose the metalsmith library [1][2] for inclusion into the bare > metal project governance. I am +1 to this. I think this is a logical inclusion to Ironic's governance, and overall benefits the ecosystem by allowing greater choice and ability to leverage ironic. Thanks Dmitry! __ 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-dev] [ironic] proposing metalsmith for inclusion into ironic governance
Hi all, I would like propose the metalsmith library [1][2] for inclusion into the bare metal project governance. What it is and is not - Metalsmith is a library and CLI tool for using Ironic+Neutron for provisioning bare metal nodes. It can be seen as a lightweight replacement of Nova when Nova is too much. The primary use case is single-tenant standalone installer. Metalsmith is not a new service, it does not maintain any state, except for state maintained by Ironic and Neutron. Metalsmith is not and will not be a replacement for Nova in any proper cloud scenario. Metalsmith does have some overlap with Bifrost, with one important feature difference: its primary feature is a mini-scheduler that allows to pick a suitable bare metal node for deployment. I have a partial convergence plan as well! First, as part of this effort I'm working on missing features in openstacksdk, which is used in the OpenStack ansible modules, which are used in Bifrost. Second, I hope we can use it as a helper for making Bifrost do scheduling decisions. Background -- Metalsmith was born with the goal of replacing Nova in TripleO undercloud. Indeed, the undercloud uses only a small subset of Nova features, while having features that conflict with Nova's design (for example, bypassing the scheduler [3]). We wanted to avoid putting a lot of provisioning logic into existing TripleO components. So I wrote a library that does not carry any TripleO-specific assumptions, but does allow to address its needs. Why under Ironic I believe the goal of Metalsmith is fully aligned with what the Ironic team is doing around standalone deployment. I think Metalsmith can provide a nice entry point into standalone deployments for people who (for any reasons) will not use Bifrost. With this change I hope to get more exposure for it. The library itself is small, documented [2], follows OpenStack practices and does not have particular operating requirements. There is nothing in it that is not familiar to the Ironic team members. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Dmitry [1] https://github.com/openstack/metalsmith [2] https://metalsmith.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ [3] http://tripleo.org/install/advanced_deployment/node_placement.html __ 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
