On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Matthias Runge <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 18/10/13 19:59, Matthew Miller wrote:...
> * Governance plan and documents
> * A product definition -- target audience and so on
> * A list of changes from existing procedures
> * Actually doing things
> I've also heard a few comments suggesting that the cloud guest shouldMatt, thank you for driving this further!
> basically just be the server product in image form, with cloud-init.
> This is a model where cloud computing is basically seen as providing
> "servers in the sky"; I think there's a place for that, but again, I
> don't think it's what we should be aiming at. The point of having this
> product as something different is so we can actually better address the
> different needs.
During the last weekend, I was thinking about the definition of cloud
working group and what we should achieve.
When thinking about what will be the role of images in the cloud, let's
say in 3-5 years, I believe, allmost every server image will be executed
in a virtual environment, i.e. in a cloud environment. Thus, I think, we
(as the cloud working group) should target this. Every image in the
cloud will be used as "server" image, to serve something.
Am I right in assuming that we are looking into cloud images for the short term as a starting point?
I know the group says cloud but I feel like we need to look more into other spaces that directly/indirectly affect us.
That would mean switched roles/targets between the server wg and the
cloud wg (in "their" target and in "cloud image" aim).
So in terms of product definition:
* we strive to provide cloud INFRASTRUCTURE to primarily execute server
images provided by the server wg, target audience will be people running
Fedora to provide infrastructure.
Speaking of live cycles: Fedora is supported for about a year. Since
infrastructure is deployed for longer cycles, we'd need to take care,
that UPGRADING works well. This is something, we're not very good right
now (compared to others).
* Change from existing procedures: Provide an easy install of a cloud
infrastructure on a (bare metal) system. For OpenStack, we'd already
have such a solution: packstack. Still we might need to re-validate
this, when OpenStack upstream might came up with a different solution.
I can't say, if there is something like an installer for OpenNebula or
Eukalyptus as well.
I totally agree on this.
I can take up its work on the cloudstack platform.
At least my boss allows me to abuse some of the resources we have a little. :-)
When looking at the cloud image produced mainly by Matt, it's very
useful to test and to make sure, Fedora runs well on other cloud
platforms. On the other hand, I don't see this single product as the
main outcome of this group.
My opinion is we need to set up what our goals(both long and short term) are .
We also need to have frameworks set up to support this.
As long as we have this it will work out well.
I am supporting your point here.
:-)
:-)
Matthias
--
Matthias Runge <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
