Hi Mark,
I think we're envisioning slightly different things here, so I wanted to
try to understand if I was unclear, or if you're describing a better way
of doing things -- and if so, what the advantages are.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:30:35AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
2) If we go with the design above where users launch instances from
the images list, a big part of what this feature needs will be the
images list and the ability to import images
Yes, I agree that the features are fairly closely related. Mostly, I
just wanted to break them apart into two smaller tasks -- give the
ability to launch images from Warehouse, and give (err, bring back) the
ability to import images using a tool in Conductor. They should both be
done, though image importation isn't required for standalone launch.
> * Actually implement it once we know where it goes, how it
should look,
> and have a better layer to connect to Warehouse. We'll collect the
> user data, probably within the context of a pool, create a deployable
> behind the scenes with this image in it, and then launch it like it's
> a normal deployable.
Hmm, I don't think we should treat standalone instances as deployments.
The current UI is deployment-centric, though: we show pools which
contain deployments, which contain instances.
If you launch a standalone image, I'm not sure why it should be treated
any differently from the non-standalone images you've launched via
deployables. It seems like we'd end up complicating the UI. Is there
some advantage that I've overlooked to doing this?
The deployments interface is specifically suited to multiple
instances.
I either misunderstand you or disagree with you here. Do you mean the
deployment detail page? A deployment has many instances, so it can
certainly support more than one instance. But everything works just as
well with only one instance. I'm not sure why one instance should be a
special case.
I'd be a little wary of implementing an "Image Warehouse
Browser" e.g.
showing images, builds, target images and provider images. This thing
doesn't need to be generic, it just needs to offer the list of images
that the user can launch.
Yes, agreed. I may have gone overboard with that description. I just
want to make sure that, when we pull back the list of images that can be
launched, we also pull back the other associated information that allows
us to show more than a list of UUIDs.
Also:
* Support for standalone instances is needed for Conductor to
implement deltacloud API
Oh, interesting. I hadn't even thought about this.
I'll work on getting this up onto the wiki.
-- Matt