My opition on this is that we have too many re-invented wheels in Fuel and it’s better think about replacing them with something we can re-use than re-inventing them one more time.
Let’s take a look at Ironic and try to figure out how we can use its features for the same purpose. - romcheg > 15 бер. 2016 р. о 10:38 Neil Jerram <neil.jer...@metaswitch.com> написав(ла): > > On 15/03/16 07:11, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote: >> Alexander, >> >> We have many other places where use Ruby (astute, puppet custom types, >> etc.). I don't think it is a good reason to re-write something just >> because it is written in Ruby. You are right about tests, about plugins, >> but let's look around. Ironic community has already invented discovery >> component (btw written in python) and I can't see any reason why we >> should continue putting efforts in nailgun agent and not try to switch >> to ironic-inspector. > > +1 in general terms. It's strange to me that there are so many > OpenStack deployment systems that each do each piece of the puzzle in > their own way (Fuel, Foreman, MAAS/Juju etc.) - and which also means > that I need substantial separate learning in order to use all these > systems. It would be great to see some consolidation. > > Regards, > Neil > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
