Thanks for following along, Eric!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Helms" <ehelms(a)redhat.com>
To: aeolus-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 3:28:46 PM
Subject: Re: Winged Monkey
The question: As a user of Openshift, aspects of the design and the
feel
of the UI feel 1-for-1 and in some respects are attempting to meet
the
same needs. On which points are there clear divisions between the
two
projects? Would I be choosing based on maturity and feature sets down
the road or is there a clear 'Openshift fills these needs' while
'Winged
Monkey fills these other needs'?
This drives to the heart of the distinction between IaaS and PaaS.
In the long term (and maybe for certain user classes), this distinction
may become completely blurred.
However, for the near term (3 years? 5 years? longer?) the distinction is
still visible. With PaaS, a consumer is getting a pre-packaged platform
environment where they can run their specific application (rails, django,
whatever). The tradeoff is the amount of control the consumer will have
with the environment they are allotted.
With IaaS, the consumer requests a set of resources based on some
specification, and will generally have larger control over those resources
than allowed under PaaS.
So, whereas OpenShift will supply a user with an environment to run a
Django app, Winged Monkey will supply a user with a resource for testing
out installing and configuring Django from scratch.
Hope that helps. Lemme know if that doesn't really clear it up.
---
Greg