aeolus-configure parameters - Was: Aeolus Community Assessment

Mo Morsi mmorsi at redhat.com
Fri Jun 8 07:46:36 UTC 2012


On 06/07/2012 09:21 PM, Michael Orazi wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> On 07/06/2012, at 4:42 AM, Matt Wagner wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> I think aeolus-configure is really slick and makes things 100 times
>>> easier than it used to be, but "edit this yaml file based on what
>>> this
>>> wiki page suggests" is _still_ not very intuitive for RHEV and
>>> vSphere
>>> configs. I'm not sure just yet on how we can solve that, but it's
>>> definitely something deserving some attention.
>> Other ways we could get info from the user:
>>
>>  + Command line argument style
>>
>>     * aeolus-configure --rhev-nfs example.org:/export/ovirtexport
>>
>>    Long command lines aside, this would be beneficial for scripting.
>>
> This is fairly reasonable though might get VERY long.  
> Another option is to consider shipping an example file and allowing the file to be passed into configure rather than looking on /etc/
>
>>  + Interactive command line style
>>
>>      * What's the name of your oVirt/RHEV NFS server? [example.org]
>>      * What is the mount point for its export domain?
>>      [/export/ovirtexport]
>>        <etc>
>>
>>    Good for newbies?
>>
> My big concern here is that there are LOTS of things that ought to be able to be specified, and it would quickly become at least marginally overwhelming even if we built some curses based UI around this.  


Ya we used to have an interactive mode in configure but that was never
used. In my experience these things tend to not be as desirable and a
bit more clunky that using the command line and / or config files.

>
>>  + Web interface (not aeolus-configure based)
>>
>>    (UX experts for this one :>)
>>
> I think I like this one the best really, but I'd an explicit -- make each configurable thing doable via a RESTful endpoint and provider some useful example scripts/cli to interact with the endpoints.  And then go further and make aeolus-configure as minimal as possible, there is still some pain to be had here thinking about how to handle multiple-machine installations.
>
>> From the Aeolus installer's (SysAdmin) perspective, the command line
>> style is good for scripting.  Whereas having everything configurable
>> from
>> the web interface is more in line with our stated (UX friendly) end
>> vision.
>>
>> No idea how important fixing this stuff is though, in comparison to
>> other
>> things.
>>
>> + Justin
>>
>> --
>> Aeolus Community Manager
>> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>>
>>
> I think it is really quite important and something that we should be pushing on pretty actively.
>
> The other part probably worth calling out, we should clarify the intended audience here.  
> For quite some time we have been trying to serve two distinct communities here:  
> (1) people that want to get a reasonable development environment setup without having to understand how to weave all the components together, and
> (2) people that are trying install & run in a (potentially) more complex production environment
>
> It seems that in trying to hit both targets we've compromised on both.  There has been some amount of talk about splitting out development setup.  This is becoming much closer to possible now with some of the bundler changes Jay has been moving along.  Perhaps we can draw some inspiration from devstack[1].
>

Ultimately the goal in either case is to get Aeolus up and running,
configure is just a means to an end in that regard. I'm leaning towards
using configure to provide a nice / high level way to install and get
the app up and running quickly without introducing too much overhead in
the development of configure so that we can focus on other components.

  -Mo





More information about the aeolus-devel mailing list