[Starlingx-discuss] Deployment Improvements Proposal

[Saul Wold]

bump

On 12/14/18 10:40 AM, Saul Wold wrote:
> 
> See more inline
> 
> On 12/14/18 6:43 AM, Peters, Matt wrote:
>> See inline.
>>
>> *From: *"Wang, Yi C" <yi.c.wang at intel.com>
>> *Date: *Friday, December 14, 2018 at 3:53 AM
>> *To: *"Peters, Matt" <Matt.Peters at windriver.com>
>> *Cc: *"starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io" 
>> <starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>
>> *Subject: *RE: Deployment Improvements Proposal
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> I just went through your slides. And I have a few questions. I 
>> appreciate if you can share more information about your proposal. Many 
>> thanks!
>>
>> 1. We know config_controller will do many things, like bootstrap 
>> configuration and controller configuration together with required 
>> hieradata generation. All the jobs of config_controller will be  taken 
>> over by Ansible, or just part of them?
>>
>> /MP> Yes most of these tasks will be handled by the Ansible playbook. 
>> However, much of the existing capabilities may be leveraged in the 
>> implementation to avoid re-writing everything.  The details will be 
>> outlined in the forthcoming spec./
>>
> We will look forward to the coming spec(s).
> 
> Will you be addressing how to handle different OS setup?  Ie will this 
> move some of the existing kickstart related configuration into the 
> Ansible playbook?  I am just starting to look at Anisble, so I am not 
> sure how much early system configuration it can take over from kickstart 
> type of scripting.
> 
> This is one of the challenges with supporting multiple os distributions, 
> not just the build side, but the installation and configuration.
> 
>> 2. Does WindRiver has plan to replace Puppet with Ansible for all 
>> configuration jobs in the future?
>>
>> /MP> There are no specific plans to replace Puppet for all 
>> configuration management.  However, there are several features being 
>> actively developed in StarlingX that will be changing the existing 
>> Puppet manifests (e.g. OpenStack Containerization)./
>>
> I think this has been mentioned already, a concern is that 
> containerization won't solve all problems, it just moves where and how 
> the configuration work happens. I think we may still need to address how 
> containers are handled as we need to address different OSes inside of 
> the containers.
> 
>> 3. For the first controller, we still need local execution of Ansible 
>> playbook for initial bootstrap. Is my understanding correct?
>>
>> /MP> This is one of the main drivers for changing some of the existing 
>> config_controller and Puppet manifest handling.  The operator will 
>> have the ability to run the Ansible playbook locally or remotely. /
>>
> 
> Another question is will this work further reduce the need for the 
> configuration related packages (again multi-os related)?  Can we move 
> the system utility configuration into this Deployment work?
> 
> Thanks
>     Sau!
> 
>> BR.
>>
>> Yi
>>
>> *From:*Peters, Matt [mailto:Matt.Peters at windriver.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, December 14, 2018 3:11 AM
>> *To:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> *Subject:* [Starlingx-discuss] Deployment Improvements Proposal
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Attached are the slides I presented during the TSC call on Dec 13, 
>> 2018 for the proposed improvements to the StarlingX initial bootstrap 
>> and system inventory.  As indicated on the call, a detailed stx-spec 
>> will follow, but wanted to share the high-level changes being proposed 
>> before the arrival of the spec to get some early feedback.
>>
>> Regards, Matt
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss