Can we make November 1 the day OpenStack works end-to-end?

Jason Guiditta jguiditt at redhat.com
Mon Oct 1 14:22:26 UTC 2012


On 01/10/12 09:45 -0400, Matt Wagner wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I've been thinking some more about OpenStack and the fact that it's
>still not working end-to-end in Aeolus. A lot of people have done a lot
>of work to get individual components working, but it's still not all
>integrated.
>
>It's been something we've been trying to do for six months, and one of
>the few bits of community feedback we've had. The situation is frankly
>kind of frustrating.
>
>So I'd like to propose that we draw an arbitrary line in the sand and
>say that, one month from today, on November 1 (a Thursday), we will have
>OpenStack working end-to-end and all requisite components released. Does
>that seem feasible? To my knowledge, that means that we will need to:
>
>1.) See that Deltacloud 1.0.4 is released.
>2.) See that Image Factory 1.2 is released.

I'll defer to Ian and Steve here, but I think, bug fixes aside, they
consider 1.2 done.  If you mean 'will it have an rpm' by that date, I
have no clue (though you can certainly build the rpm from source if
you want to abandon a 'working' current version).

>3.) Implement IME, or if that won't be ready by November 1, update
>aeolus-image-rubygem to work with Image Factory 1.2.
>
Integration here is already planned, and will take (conservatively) 2
sprints, which puts us at about mid-november.  If you are running from
source/upstream only, I think you should have something fairly
workable, but likely not 100% done, by that time.  Upgrading
aeolus-image as it exists now to work with the new factory (which
really should be called 2.0, not 1.2, it is so different) would be an
exercise in futility.  All the iwhd functionality is moved into
factory proper, and the data structure is different as well, so there
is no way it would work, sorry.  

>While this feels a little bit like an aggressive schedule, this is
>something that's already been 6 months in the making. I really think we
>need to get this wrapped up soon. Does this seem like a workable plan to
>everyone?
>
>-- Matt

I appreciate your frustration, but the work to make this happen is
well underway, and arbitrary deadlines, as always, will not make that
happen any faster.  If you wish to help make sure it is a smooth
transition, I would invite you to build and test both the new version
of factory[1], as well as IME[2].  Submit issue for IME on github, and
Martyn or I will do our best to address them asap.  For factory, I am
not sure what their process is for issues these days - they do use pull
requests, so I suspect they would see any issue posted to github as
well. We have a lot of examples on the IME README on how to call the
api, and the setup uses rvmrc if you choose - otherwise, create your 
own gemset and follow the directions there, I think it shoudl be 
relatively painless.  If there are pain points, or missing steps, pull
requests are gladly accepted. Note that we also have an integration
plan[3] that was worked through with jan and scott, which you are 
welcome to peruse and contribute to. Most or all of these tasks were
added by jan to redmine, though on the ime side we will likely port
them over as we experiment with using github issues more.

[1] https://github.com/aeolusproject/imagefactory
[2] https://github.com/aeolus-incubator/image-management-engine/
[3]
http://etherpad-aeolusproject.rhcloud.com/p/aeolus_conductor_integration

Thanks for continuing to push this forward, I think we are closing in
on some very good feature improvements here.

-j



More information about the aeolus-devel mailing list