Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing some DevOps love to Openstack

2014-10-29 Thread Jim Meyer 
On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Philip Cheong  wrote:
> Yes, the aim is to get a vagrant-openstack provider plugin under Hashicorp's 
> or Mitchellh's github account. Whether you call that "official" or "blessed", 
> doesn't really matter.
> 
> In order for Vagrant to integrate with other tools such as Packer there needs 
> to be a preferred plugin. Hopefully the owners of the other plugins will 
> agree to deprecate theirs so that an end can be put to the fragmentation that 
> has happened so far and direct contributors to the correct place. 

My advice would be: get started now; worry about others deprecating at the 
Vancouver summit. ;]

My experience has been that people who care look for people they know involved, 
popularity, and currency/signs-of-life. I'd bet that if you:

* Provide the plugin under a clearly related, "official" github account which 
has good reputation (either hashicorp or mitchellh work for this)
* Actively maintain it so the commit history shows signs of life
* Publicize it widely, from their blog as well as others

... you'll gain the momentum you want within 3-6 months.

--j


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing some DevOps love to Openstack

2014-10-29 Thread Flavio Percoco 

On 29/10/14 15:30 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:

Yes, the aim is to get a vagrant-openstack provider plugin under Hashicorp's or
Mitchellh's github account. Whether you call that "official" or "blessed",
doesn't really matter.

In order for Vagrant to integrate with other tools such as Packer there needs
to be a preferred plugin. Hopefully the owners of the other plugins will agree
to deprecate theirs so that an end can be put to the fragmentation that has
happened so far and direct contributors to the correct place. 


FWIW, I'm happy to deprecate mine!

Flavio




On 29 October 2014 10:04, Flavio Percoco  wrote:

   On 28/10/14 21:23 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:

   Hi all,

   In preparation of the OpenStack Summit in Paris next week, I'm hoping
   to speak
   to some people in the OpenStack foundation about the benefits of a
   partnership
   with Hashicorp, who make fantastic tools like Vagrant and Packer (and
   others).

   As a n00b aspiring to become an OpenStack contributor, the variety of
   Vagrant
   devstack environments is pretty overwhelming. It appears to me that it
   really
   depends on what project you are contributing to, which denotes which
   devstack
   you should use. The ones I have tried take a long time (45 mins+) to
   provision
   from scratch. 

   One aspect which I am acutely aware of is developer productivity and 45
   minutes
   is a lot of time. Packer was designed to help alleviate bottleneck, and
   Vagrantcloud has inbuilt support for the versioning of Vagrant boxes.
   It would
   be a pretty straight forward exercise to use Packer to do a daily (or
   however
   often) build of a devstack box and upload it to Vagrantcloud for
   developers to
   download. With a decent internet connection that time would be
   significantly
   less than 45 minutes.

   I would really like to think that this community should also be able to
   come to
   a consensus over what to include in a "standard" devstack. That there
   currently
   seems to be many different flavours cannot help with issues of
   fragmentation
   between so many different moving parts to build an OpenStack
   environment.

   Another big issue that I hope to address with the foundation, is the
   integration of Hashicorp's tools with OpenStack. 

   The various Vagrant plugins to add OpenStack as a provider is a mess.
   There is
   one specific for Rackspace who have a different Keystone API, and at
   least 3
   others for the vanilla OpenStack:
   https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant-rackspace
   https://github.com/ggiamarchi/vagrant-openstack-provider
   https://github.com/cloudbau/vagrant-openstack-plugin
   https://github.com/FlaPer87/vagrant-openstack


   I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even work any more, I don't even know
   ruby ;)

   I do see a value in having a vagrant-openstack provider but I don't
   think we should pick one and mark it as blessed. We're trying very
   hard to move away from 'blessing' projecs, at the very least depend
   less on it.

   Anyone should feel free to create the provider on stackforge and
   maintain it. What would be even better is to have Hashicorp itself
   creating and maintaining this provider.

   Cheers,
   Flavio



   The significance of not having an "official" provider, for one example,
   is when
   you use Packer to build an image in OpenStack and try to post-process
   it into a
   Vagrant box, it bombs with this error:


      ==> openstack: Running post-processor: vagrant
      Build 'openstack' errored: 1 error(s) occurred:

      * Post-processor failed: Unknown artifact type, can't build box:
      mitchellh.openstack


   Because Packer doesn't know what Vagrant expects the provider to be, as
   explained here.

   In my opinion this a pretty big issue holding back the wider acceptance
   of
   OpenStack. When I am at a customer and introduce them to tools like
   Vagrant and
   Packer and how well they work with AWS, I still avoid the conversation
   about
   OpenStack when I would really love to put them on our (Elastx's) public
   cloud.

   What say you? Could I get a +1 from those who see this as a worthwhile
   issue?

   Cheers,

   Phil.
   --
   Philip Cheong
   Elastx | Public and Private PaaS
   email: philip.che...@elastx.se
   office: +46 8 557 728 10
   mobile: +46 702 870 814
   twitter: @Elastx
   http://elastx.se


   ___
   OpenStack-dev mailing list
   OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
   http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
  
  


   --
   @flaper87
   Flavio Percoco
  
   ___

   OpenStack-d

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing some DevOps love to Openstack

2014-10-29 Thread Philip Cheong 
Yes, the aim is to get a vagrant-openstack provider plugin under
Hashicorp's or Mitchellh's github account. Whether you call that "official"
or "blessed", doesn't really matter.

In order for Vagrant to integrate with other tools such as Packer there
needs to be a preferred plugin. Hopefully the owners of the other plugins
will agree to deprecate theirs so that an end can be put to the
fragmentation that has happened so far and direct contributors to the
correct place.


On 29 October 2014 10:04, Flavio Percoco  wrote:

> On 28/10/14 21:23 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In preparation of the OpenStack Summit in Paris next week, I'm hoping to
>> speak
>> to some people in the OpenStack foundation about the benefits of a
>> partnership
>> with Hashicorp, who make fantastic tools like Vagrant and Packer (and
>> others).
>>
>> As a n00b aspiring to become an OpenStack contributor, the variety of
>> Vagrant
>> devstack environments is pretty overwhelming. It appears to me that it
>> really
>> depends on what project you are contributing to, which denotes which
>> devstack
>> you should use. The ones I have tried take a long time (45 mins+) to
>> provision
>> from scratch.
>>
>> One aspect which I am acutely aware of is developer productivity and 45
>> minutes
>> is a lot of time. Packer was designed to help alleviate bottleneck, and
>> Vagrantcloud has inbuilt support for the versioning of Vagrant boxes. It
>> would
>> be a pretty straight forward exercise to use Packer to do a daily (or
>> however
>> often) build of a devstack box and upload it to Vagrantcloud for
>> developers to
>> download. With a decent internet connection that time would be
>> significantly
>> less than 45 minutes.
>>
>> I would really like to think that this community should also be able to
>> come to
>> a consensus over what to include in a "standard" devstack. That there
>> currently
>> seems to be many different flavours cannot help with issues of
>> fragmentation
>> between so many different moving parts to build an OpenStack environment.
>>
>> Another big issue that I hope to address with the foundation, is the
>> integration of Hashicorp's tools with OpenStack.
>>
>> The various Vagrant plugins to add OpenStack as a provider is a mess.
>> There is
>> one specific for Rackspace who have a different Keystone API, and at
>> least 3
>> others for the vanilla OpenStack:
>> https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant-rackspace
>> https://github.com/ggiamarchi/vagrant-openstack-provider
>> https://github.com/cloudbau/vagrant-openstack-plugin
>> https://github.com/FlaPer87/vagrant-openstack
>>
>
> I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even work any more, I don't even know
> ruby ;)
>
> I do see a value in having a vagrant-openstack provider but I don't
> think we should pick one and mark it as blessed. We're trying very
> hard to move away from 'blessing' projecs, at the very least depend
> less on it.
>
> Anyone should feel free to create the provider on stackforge and
> maintain it. What would be even better is to have Hashicorp itself
> creating and maintaining this provider.
>
> Cheers,
> Flavio
>
>
>> The significance of not having an "official" provider, for one example,
>> is when
>> you use Packer to build an image in OpenStack and try to post-process it
>> into a
>> Vagrant box, it bombs with this error:
>>
>>
>>==> openstack: Running post-processor: vagrant
>>Build 'openstack' errored: 1 error(s) occurred:
>>
>>* Post-processor failed: Unknown artifact type, can't build box:
>>mitchellh.openstack
>>
>>
>> Because Packer doesn't know what Vagrant expects the provider to be, as
>> explained here.
>>
>> In my opinion this a pretty big issue holding back the wider acceptance of
>> OpenStack. When I am at a customer and introduce them to tools like
>> Vagrant and
>> Packer and how well they work with AWS, I still avoid the conversation
>> about
>> OpenStack when I would really love to put them on our (Elastx's) public
>> cloud.
>>
>> What say you? Could I get a +1 from those who see this as a worthwhile
>> issue?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Phil.
>> --
>> Philip Cheong
>> Elastx | Public and Private PaaS
>> email: philip.che...@elastx.se
>> office: +46 8 557 728 10
>> mobile: +46 702 870 814
>> twitter: @Elastx
>> http://elastx.se
>>
>
>  ___
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
> --
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
>
> ___
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
*Philip Cheong*
*Elastx *| Public and Private PaaS
email: philip.che...@elastx.se
office: +46 8 557 728 10
mobile: +46 702 870 814
twitter: @Elastx 
http://elastx.se
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-de

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Bringing some DevOps love to Openstack

2014-10-29 Thread Flavio Percoco 

On 28/10/14 21:23 +0100, Philip Cheong wrote:

Hi all,

In preparation of the OpenStack Summit in Paris next week, I'm hoping to speak
to some people in the OpenStack foundation about the benefits of a partnership
with Hashicorp, who make fantastic tools like Vagrant and Packer (and others).

As a n00b aspiring to become an OpenStack contributor, the variety of Vagrant
devstack environments is pretty overwhelming. It appears to me that it really
depends on what project you are contributing to, which denotes which devstack
you should use. The ones I have tried take a long time (45 mins+) to provision
from scratch. 

One aspect which I am acutely aware of is developer productivity and 45 minutes
is a lot of time. Packer was designed to help alleviate bottleneck, and
Vagrantcloud has inbuilt support for the versioning of Vagrant boxes. It would
be a pretty straight forward exercise to use Packer to do a daily (or however
often) build of a devstack box and upload it to Vagrantcloud for developers to
download. With a decent internet connection that time would be significantly
less than 45 minutes.

I would really like to think that this community should also be able to come to
a consensus over what to include in a "standard" devstack. That there currently
seems to be many different flavours cannot help with issues of fragmentation
between so many different moving parts to build an OpenStack environment.

Another big issue that I hope to address with the foundation, is the
integration of Hashicorp's tools with OpenStack. 

The various Vagrant plugins to add OpenStack as a provider is a mess. There is
one specific for Rackspace who have a different Keystone API, and at least 3
others for the vanilla OpenStack:
https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant-rackspace
https://github.com/ggiamarchi/vagrant-openstack-provider
https://github.com/cloudbau/vagrant-openstack-plugin
https://github.com/FlaPer87/vagrant-openstack


I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even work any more, I don't even know
ruby ;)

I do see a value in having a vagrant-openstack provider but I don't
think we should pick one and mark it as blessed. We're trying very
hard to move away from 'blessing' projecs, at the very least depend
less on it.

Anyone should feel free to create the provider on stackforge and
maintain it. What would be even better is to have Hashicorp itself
creating and maintaining this provider.

Cheers,
Flavio



The significance of not having an "official" provider, for one example, is when
you use Packer to build an image in OpenStack and try to post-process it into a
Vagrant box, it bombs with this error:


   ==> openstack: Running post-processor: vagrant
   Build 'openstack' errored: 1 error(s) occurred:

   * Post-processor failed: Unknown artifact type, can't build box:
   mitchellh.openstack


Because Packer doesn't know what Vagrant expects the provider to be, as
explained here.

In my opinion this a pretty big issue holding back the wider acceptance of
OpenStack. When I am at a customer and introduce them to tools like Vagrant and
Packer and how well they work with AWS, I still avoid the conversation about
OpenStack when I would really love to put them on our (Elastx's) public cloud.

What say you? Could I get a +1 from those who see this as a worthwhile issue?

Cheers,

Phil.
--
Philip Cheong
Elastx | Public and Private PaaS
email: philip.che...@elastx.se
office: +46 8 557 728 10
mobile: +46 702 870 814
twitter: @Elastx
http://elastx.se



___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpJKR8bOPu2l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev