On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 4:01 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <std...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Emilen,
>
> You say "the previous *PTL* of an OpenStack installation automation project" 
> as if there were only one previous PTL :)  There are many previous PTLs of 
> OpenStack automation projects.  I feel the question was directed at me, so 
> I'll answer.

( I didn't ask for it but Clay Gerrard did. I also gave my insights,
waiting for others previous PTL, like you, to give thoughts too. )

> ________________________________________
> From: Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 8:03 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] TC candidacy
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Clay Gerrard <clay.gerr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Make sure it works outside Devstack.
>>>>
>>>> There is a huge gap between what is tested by Devstack gate and what
>>>> operators
>>>> deploy on the field.  This gap tends to stretch the feedback loop between
>>>> developers and operators.  As a community, we might want to reduce this
>>>> gap
>>>> and make OpenStack testing more effective and more realistic.
>>>> That's an area of focus I would like to work and spread over OpenStack
>>>> projects if I'm elected.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is a really interesting platform point.  It's been a concern in he
>>> community since *at least* Vancouver [1].  We've had lots of different
>>> viewpoints towards project install-ability raised this election:
>>>
>>> John Dickenson says installation of projects should go horizontal [2]
>>> Monty Taylor says services oriented deployment teams are the wasteful
>>> exception [3]
>>> John Griffith says how the TC approaches services oriented OpenStack will be
>>> an important factor in the future definition of OpenStack and it's relevancy
>>> [4]
>>>
>>
>> Before I start replying to the questions, I would like to note that
>> I'm not against Devstack and I still see some value of such a project.
>> Devstack has been so far the first deployment tool that is used by
>> OpenStack continuous integration, my point is really about adding more
>> CI coverage.
>>
>>> Do you think this is an important topic for OpenStack right now?  I'd be
>>> really interested to hear any *new* insights from the previous PTL of *one*
>>> of OpenStack's installation automation projects?  What could or should be
>>> done to reduce the bias/reliance towards a devstack or an
>>> "openstack-all-in-one" deployment model?  Can or should the TC be the
>>> champion of the discussion around "how to install" OpenStack?  How much of
>>> an impact does choices made in *testing* effect the install-ability and
>>> ease-of-use of OpenStack in general?
>>
>
> In my early history as a leader prior to OpenStack, I believed exceptions 
> were the norm.  I then read Clayton Christensen's Harvard Business Review 
> article "How will you measure your life?"[1] and it fundamentally changed my 
> thinking on exceptions.  (Full disclosure, I graduated from Northern Arizona 
> University in 1998, not Harvard in 2010).  I would encourage everyone first 
> to read the article "How will you measure your life?" and vote afterwards.  
> Please do vote - without your vote, your voice isn't heard on how you want 
> the OpenStack TC to function.  The short version of Christensen's theory is 
> exceptions lead to more exceptions lead to more exceptions leads to an 
> untenable situation with all sorts of negative outcomes.  I was actually 
> suffering through this exact scenario in my early career and one of my 
> greatest mentors pointed me at this article which put me on the right track.
>
> Now I give awareness of it to you.
>
> Kolla has been led exception free since day 0.  I have hope this continues 
> into the future since I have elected not to run to serve as PTL of Kolla and 
> instead focus on serving as a TC member if elected.
>
> Unfortunately answering your questions is an exception in and to itself.  
> However, I also believe in being direct and honest with individuals as you 
> can see in my self-nomination to the TC and have a strong disdain for 
> individuals that waste time by avoiding questions, so I'll answer.
>
> What should be done about the reliance as devstack as gating mechanism for 
> all OpenStack software?  I proposed an answer here [2] essentially asking 
> core reviewers and PTLs of projects interested in being consumed by various 
> individuals interested in using the software these projects produced to 
> contribute to Kolla (or pick your operational deployment manager of choice) 
> to fill out the big tent.  That thread had a wildly successful outcome for 
> Kolla - 15 new services implemented in Newton!  The obvious next step is now 
> to gate on these services in various service defined as "Core".  Answer: Let 
> the projects themselves sort it out with a whole bunch of help from the 
> rockin openstack-infra team.  The TC need not be involved.
>
> Should the TC pick winners and losers by defining the "one true way" to 
> install OpenStack assuming everyone plays by the same rules?  Feels like an 
> exception to me of the TC charter.  Answer no.
>
> How much of an impact does testing make in the ability to install OpenStack?  
> Answer: Not all that much.  ODMs either installs or they don't.  ODM's either 
> upgrade or they don't.  ODMs either reconfigures or they don't.  This is a 20 
> minute test in Kolla -> enable all services, deploy, upgrade, reconfigure.
>
> The real question is "Does it work?" after deploy/upgrade/reconfigure.  This 
> is where the hard testing comes in, whether manual or automated.  Manual 
> testing does scale well enough with the growth of the big tent to keep up 
> with current big tent growth.  It is mostly what Kolla uses and I feel the 
> Kolla team can keep up with the growth of the big tent in spite of the curve 
> balls thrown our way on a weekly basis.  If I didn't feel this way, I 
> wouldn't have added kolla-kubernetes to Kolla's governance repository.  
> Clearly automated testing is superior.
>
> If you make one choice today that you want to change your life for the 
> better, click the link [1] below.
>
> [1] 
> https://d6d5dc73-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/philosophypsychologymanagement/documents/Howwillyoumeasureyourlife.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7criy1MlWLqImb6rrCGWI0eeRJVjAFtQK_zFSX_r9biW1IiCNu0iMLD0OfJ3wD0z-vzMv5GVOFAwGHCxpcTgfrlm1tB2mmlbkt4aWqQ-PV9ed6-cnlw2OEdUZkJVZ68cVxdp8y1kAksIZ3jGN_tCRKFOPCqRwmH-7i4YVvq1zt-MnCnporrs00YipWRdQQeeS1EtUP8Pm9gW2Rl0QhRDgstsyMAcLjN2Y5ObCQhBpmpxtgE0G0AUnsIDNIteznVJmidp5MMKGdz7kZMunwoDtxv2J4lyXg%3D%3D&attredirects=0
>
> [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/090546.html
>
> Regards,
> -steve
>
>> 1) Do you think this is an important topic for OpenStack right now?
>> Yes. Making sure that OpenStack can be installed, upgraded and
>> operated outside devstack is in my opinion an important long-term
>> topic that needs to be addressed right now.
>>
>> 2) What could or should be done to reduce the bias/reliance towards a
>> devstack or an "openstack-all-in-one" deployment model?
>> Some projects (Heat, Ironic, etc) already run non-devstack jobs,
>> example given with TripleO.
>> I'm not going to make advertising for this project but it's an example
>> of installer that deploys a good set of service with uses-cases close
>> to production: multinode, SSL, IPv6, upgrade testing, network
>> isolation, etc.
>> We could see more of it in OpenStack, where projects like TripleO,
>> Kolla, Fuel, etc, could run their CI jobs in projects like Nova or
>> Swift for example.
>> It would reduce the feedback loop between developers and operators
>> when something breaks (backward compatibility testing is a good
>> use-case), or increase coverage (things that Devstack doesn't test).
>
> I'm actually proposing to run TripleO multinode job in Nova experimental jobs:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/381322/
> It's non-voting and run at demand, so we're not breaking anything.
>
> tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode is a CI job that takes ~40-60
> minutes (we're working on reducing its runtime) and deploy TripleO in
> multinode environment.
> I think it would be a good start to see if non-devstack jobs would
> bring useful feedback.
>
>> 3) Can or should the TC be the champion of the discussion around "how
>> to install" OpenStack?
>> I don't think so. To me, it's up to our community to decide how to
>> install OpenStack.
>> The deployment tool (ansible versus chef versus puppet, etc) is
>> something that we can't choose on behalf of our operators, because
>> they already have tools to manage their existing infrastructure.
>> Where TC could help, is to drive OpenStack deployment tools projects
>> to increase their impact in OpenStack testing with a final goal of
>> reducing the feedback loop between devs & ops.
>>
>> 4) How much of an impact does choices made in *testing* effect the
>> install-ability and ease-of-use of OpenStack in general?
>> - evaluate how a project does respect backward compatibility in
>> configuration and APIs.
>> - evaluate if projects can actually be upgraded by using operator and
>> not something that operators don't use (devstack / grenade).
>> That's the two things that directly came into my mind.
>>
>>> Somewhat unrelated.  Do you have any personal thoughts/insights on how you
>>> believe OpenStack should approach potentially disruptive or "competing"
>>> design in general - like ansible/puppet or even Kolla?
>>
>> I don't think Ansible / Puppet OpenStack / Kolla / TripleO / Fuel /
>> (...) compete in design, but they rather fit (or match) the needs of
>> people who deploy OpenStack in production.
>> In my experience of deployment, I've seen many cases where a company
>> already used Ansible (or Puppet or Chef, etc) in their infrastructure,
>> and picked the same tool to deploy OpenStack, to accelerate their
>> adoption and facilitate their deployment team.
>> Such a diversity is in my opinion awesome as long as we directly
>> consume what is produced by upstream projects and report immediate
>> feedback with CI and horizontal collaboration.
>>
>> I hope I answered to the questions, and if not please let me know, I'm
>> always open for questions and feedback.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>
>
>
> --
> Emilien Macchi
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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



-- 
Emilien Macchi

__________________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to