Folks: We started this discussion at the last Atomic General meeting, but didn't resolve it. You can find the actual discussion here: http://etherpad.osuosl.org/atomic-community-meeting
The Problem ------------ Currently we kind of promote Kubernetes as our main orchestrator for upstream Atomic (Fedora Atomic and Centos Atomic). However, we also promote upstream Atomic as a plaform for Origin. There are two problems with our current approach: 1. we don't realistically have the resources to package, document, and promote both upstream Kubernetes and Origin on upstream Atomic. 2. not having a default option with clear & complete documentation confuses users and doesn't present them with a complete system. As a result, we need to decide which platform is the one we promote first, and ensure has a complete and up-to-date toolchain. Kubernetes First ---------------- Advantages: * more upstream/cutting edge stuff * better able to connect with, promote through, Kubernetes community and developers * kubernetes is much better known than OpenShift * FLIBS, CP containers mostly work on Fedora Disadvantages: * most Red Hat staff work with OpenShift * could not count on help from downstream (RHEL Atomic) * doesn't integrate with some of our other projects (e.g. gluster storage) Origin First ------------ Advantages: * nice GUI * better app developer experience * better documentation for administration * able to combine work with downstream folks Disadvantages: * lose most of Kubernetes developer/user community * installation on Fedora is problematic and poorly maintained * Atomic not seen as next-gen platform * would need to refactor FLIBS, CP to have Origin-worthy containers ================== So, thoughts? And more discussion on Monday. -- -- Josh Berkus Project Atomic Red Hat OSAS
