Steve Baker wrote on 21.11.2013 21:19:07:
> From: Steve Baker
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 21.11.2013 21:25
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 11/21/2013 08:48 PM,
Thomas Spatzier wrote on 11/21/2013 02:48:14
AM:
> ...
> Now thinking more about update scenarios (which we can leave for an
> iteration after the initial deployment is working),
I recommend thinking about UPDATE from the start. We should have an
implementation in which CREATE and UPDATE share
On 11/21/2013 08:48 PM, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
> Excerpts from Steve Baker's message on 21.11.2013 00:00:47:
>> From: Steve Baker
>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
>> Date: 21.11.2013 00:04
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuratio
Excerpts from Steve Baker's message on 21.11.2013 00:00:47:
> From: Steve Baker
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 21.11.2013 00:04
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 11/21/
Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer's message of 2013-11-20 15:16:45 -0800:
> Clint Byrum wrote on 11/20/2013 05:41:16 PM:
>
> > Autoscaling doesn't really fly with stateful services IMO.
>
> I presume you're concerned about the "auto" part, not the "scaling". Even
> a stateful group is something you
Clint Byrum wrote on 11/20/2013 05:41:16 PM:
> Autoscaling doesn't really fly with stateful services IMO.
I presume you're concerned about the "auto" part, not the "scaling". Even
a stateful group is something you may want to scale; it just takes a more
complex set of operations to accomplish
Steve Baker wrote on 11/20/2013 06:00:47 PM:
...
> > What I meant to convey is "let's give this piece of the interface a
lot of
> > thought". Not "this is wrong to even have." Given a couple of days
now,
> > I think we do need "apply" and "remove". We should also provide really
> > solid example
Regarding my previous email:
> Steve Baker wrote on 11/19/2013 03:40:54 PM:
> ...
> > How to define and deliver this agent is the challenge. Some options
are:
> > 1) install it as part of the image customization/bootstrapping (golden
> > images or cloud-init)
>
> > 2) define a (mustache?) temp
On 11/21/2013 11:41 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer's message of 2013-11-20 13:46:25 -0800:
>> Clint Byrum wrote on 11/19/2013 04:28:31 PM:
>>> From: Clint Byrum
>>> To: openstack-dev ,
>>> Date: 11/19/2013 04:30 PM
>>>
Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer's message of 2013-11-20 13:46:25 -0800:
> Clint Byrum wrote on 11/19/2013 04:28:31 PM:
> > From: Clint Byrum
> > To: openstack-dev ,
> > Date: 11/19/2013 04:30 PM
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
On 11/21/2013 10:46 AM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> Clint Byrum wrote on 11/19/2013 04:28:31 PM:
> > From: Clint Byrum
> > To: openstack-dev ,
> > Date: 11/19/2013 04:30 PM
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> > refined after design su
Clint Byrum wrote on 11/19/2013 04:28:31 PM:
> From: Clint Byrum
> To: openstack-dev ,
> Date: 11/19/2013 04:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> Excerpts from Steve Baker's message of
Steve Baker wrote on 11/19/2013 03:40:54 PM:
...
> How to define and deliver this agent is the challenge. Some options are:
> 1) install it as part of the image customization/bootstrapping (golden
> images or cloud-init)
> 2) define a (mustache?) template in the SoftwareConfig which
> os-collect-
Steve Baker wrote on 20.11.2013 09:51:34:
> From: Steve Baker
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 20.11.2013 09:55
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 11/20/2013 09:29 PM, Clint Byru
: 19.11.2013 21:43
>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
>>> refined after design summit discussions
>>>
>>
>>> I think there needs to a CM tool specific agent delivered to the server
>>> which os-collect-config invokes
Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-19 23:35:40 -0800:
> Excerpts from Steve Baker's message on 19.11.2013 21:40:54:
> > From: Steve Baker
> > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> > Date: 19.11.2013 21:43
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-d
Excerpts from Steve Baker's message on 19.11.2013 21:40:54:
> From: Steve Baker
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 19.11.2013 21:43
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> I thin
Excerpts from Steve Baker's message of 2013-11-19 13:06:21 -0800:
> On 11/20/2013 09:50 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > Excerpts from Steve Baker's message of 2013-11-18 12:52:04 -0800:
> >> Regarding apply_config/remove_config, if a SoftwareApplier resource is
> >> deleted it should trigger any remove_
On 11/20/2013 09:50 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Steve Baker's message of 2013-11-18 12:52:04 -0800:
>> Regarding apply_config/remove_config, if a SoftwareApplier resource is
>> deleted it should trigger any remove_config and wait for the server to
>> acknowledge when that is complete. Th
Excerpts from Steve Baker's message of 2013-11-18 12:52:04 -0800:
>
> Regarding apply_config/remove_config, if a SoftwareApplier resource is
> deleted it should trigger any remove_config and wait for the server to
> acknowledge when that is complete. This allows for any
> evacuation/deregistering
On 11/19/2013 08:37 PM, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
> Steve Baker wrote on 18.11.2013 21:52:04:
>> From: Steve Baker
>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
>> Date: 18.11.2013 21:54
>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
>> refine
Steve Baker wrote on 18.11.2013 21:52:04:
> From: Steve Baker
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 18.11.2013 21:54
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 11/19/2013 02:22 AM, Thomas Spatz
On 11/19/2013 02:22 AM, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have reworked the wiki page [1] I created last week to reflect
> discussions we had on the mail list and in IRC. From ML discussions last
> week it looked like we were all basically on the same page (with some
> details to be worked out
Hi all,
I have reworked the wiki page [1] I created last week to reflect
discussions we had on the mail list and in IRC. From ML discussions last
week it looked like we were all basically on the same page (with some
details to be worked out), and I hope the new draft eliminates some
confusion that
It seems to me we have been discussing a proposal whose write-up
intertwines two ideas: (1) making software components look like resources,
and (2) using nested stacks and environments to achieve the pattern of
definitions and uses. The ideas are separable, and I think the discussion
has sort
On 11/14/2013 06:02 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 13/11/13 01:34, Clint Byrum wrote:
>> Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2013-11-12 15:22:44 -0800:
>>> >IMO is should just be a template/formatted file.
>>> >
>> I'd prefer that we have the ability to pull in a chunk of in-line
>> template
>> a
On 11/14/2013 06:11 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 11/11/13 17:57, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
>> for HOT software configuration based on discussions at the design summit
>> last week. Angus also put a sample up in
On 13/11/13 18:29, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
It also doesn't support a list, but I think we can and should fix that
>in HOT.
Doesn't DependsOn already support lists? I quickly checked the code and it
seems it does:
https://github.com/openstack/heat/blob/master/heat/engine/resource.py#L288
Oh, coo
Zane Bitter wrote on 13.11.2013 18:11:18:
> From: Zane Bitter
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 13.11.2013 18:14
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 11/11/13 17:57, Thomas Spatzier
On 11/11/13 17:57, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
Hi all,
I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
for HOT software configuration based on discussions at the design summit
last week. Angus also put a sample up in an etherpad last week, but we did
not have enough time to
On 13/11/13 01:34, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2013-11-12 15:22:44 -0800:
>IMO is should just be a template/formatted file.
>
I'd prefer that we have the ability to pull in a chunk of in-line template
as well. Perhaps that is the template resource, I have not tho
Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message on 13.11.2013 09:59:56:
> From: Clint Byrum
> To: openstack-dev ,
> Date: 13.11.2013 10:03
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier
Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-13 00:28:59 -0800:
> Angus Salkeld wrote on 13.11.2013 00:22:44:
> > From: Angus Salkeld
> > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> > Date: 13.11.2013 00:25
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software
Angus Salkeld wrote on 13.11.2013 00:22:44:
> From: Angus Salkeld
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
> Date: 13.11.2013 00:25
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> On 12/11/13 10:32 -08
Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote on 12.11.2013
21:27:13:
> From: Georgy Okrokvertskhov
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> ,
> Date: 12.11.2013 21:29
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after desi
Excerpts form Clint Byrum's message on 12.11.2013 19:32:50:
> From: Clint Byrum
> To: openstack-dev ,
> Date: 12.11.2013 19:35
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Heat] HOT software configuration
> refined after design summit discussions
>
> Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier
Excerpts from Angus Salkeld's message of 2013-11-12 15:22:44 -0800:
> On 12/11/13 10:32 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
> >Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-11 08:57:58 -0800:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
> >> for HO
On 12/11/13 10:32 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-11 08:57:58 -0800:
Hi all,
I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
for HOT software configuration based on discussions at the design summit
last week. Angus also put
Hi,
I agree with Clint that component placement specified inside component
configuration is not a right thing. I remember that mostly everyone agreed
that "hosted_on" should not be in HOT templates. When one specify placement
explicitly inside a component definition it prevents the following:
1.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-11 08:57:58 -0800:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
> > for HOT software configuration based on discussions at the design summi
Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-11-11 08:57:58 -0800:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have just posted the following wiki page to reflect a refined proposal
> for HOT software configuration based on discussions at the design summit
> last week. Angus also put a sample up in an etherpad last wee
Thanks Steve, Zane, Mike. I withdraw the $idea ... for now (*).
As a user who wants to move away from fiddling with infrastructure I
like where this is going. :)
--A
(*) If there start to be lots of get_param usages and other keywords
then perhaps $this -- and requiring $$ escapes -- or
Zane Bitter wrote on 11/12/2013 12:06:14 PM:
> ... However, if
> for any reason you have a dict key starting with "$" and we interpret
> that specially, then you are basically hosed since you almost certainly
> _needed_ it to actually start with "$" for a reason. So -1.
>
> cheers,
> Zane.
Y
On 12/11/13 14:59, Alex Heneveld wrote:
One minor suggestion is to consider using a special character (eg $)
rather than reserved keywords. As I understand it the keywords are only
interpreted when they exactly match the value of a key in a map, so it
is already unlikely to be problematic. Howe
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 01:59:35PM +, Alex Heneveld wrote:
> This new proposal [1] looks like a very positive change on top of
> [2]. Simpler both to read and write.
Agreed, thanks Thomas for taking the time to write this up, it looks like a
good reflection of what was discussed last week to
+1
This new proposal [1] looks like a very positive change on top of [2].
Simpler both to read and write.
One minor suggestion is to consider using a special character (eg $)
rather than reserved keywords. As I understand it the keywords are only
interpreted when they exactly match the va
46 matches
Mail list logo
