On 07/27/11 - 10:30:35AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hmm, I don't think we should treat standalone instances as
deployments.
The deployments interface is specifically suited to multiple instances.
I think it would be more than a bit weird if "Launch Image" sent you to
the deployments UI. An architecturally, I see deployments as being
layered on top of the standalone instances.
I think I would have to agree with Matt here that we should *not* special
case single instances. There is certainly a case to be made for making the
simple things simple, and wrapping a single instance with a deployment
complicates things without much benefit. However, it keeps our model
consistent, which I think is important both for the codebase (no special cases)
and for documenting/explaining to users. That is, users are going to have
to grasp the concept of a deployable in order to use our system in any
non-trivial way, so the fact that we expose everything as a deployable,
including single instances, keeps this consistent.
As a side benefit, wrapping a single instance as a deployable also allows us
to continue to use Audrey/Config Server as you do for multiple instances. The
benefits of audrey for a single instance aren't as big as they are for
multiple, but again it keeps things consistent and allows you to do the same
things with single instances that you can for multiple instances.
--
Chris Lalancette