settingsLogin | Registersettings

[openstack-dev] [tc][appcat] The future of the App Catalog

0 votes

Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer). Thanks !

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
asked Mar 15, 2017 in openstack-dev by Thierry_Carrez (57,480 points)   3 8 13

61 Responses

0 votes

On 06/03/17 12:26 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

This is the part I think is more important when thinking about App Catalog. As a
community, I think we should be working more and more with other communities.
Containers, in general, are a technology we've been embracing for a couple of
years already. We've talked about building bridges between the OpenStack
community and other containers community because we can indeed complement each
other.

I think this is a great opportunity for us to not only adopt an existing
marketplace but also for us to not re-invent the wheel when it comes to shipping
apps that can be consumed by people outside OpenStack. By building containers
for apps in our marketplace and using docker hub, we would not only be
standardazing what we have with an already-known format but we'd also be
building better bridges across the OpenStack community, Docker's community and other
COEs' communities.

As it stands right now, I'd be all for doing this change but I'm also curious to
know what other members (especially folks that have worked on App Catalog) think
about it.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

responded Mar 6, 2017 by Flavio_Percoco (36,960 points)   3 7 11
0 votes

On 03/06/2017 06:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer). Thanks !

Mirantis' position is that the App Catalog was a good idea, but we agree
with you that other application repositories like DockerHub and Quay.io
are both more useful and more actively used.

The OpenStack App Catalog does indeed seem to unnecessarily compete with
those application repositories, and we would support its retirement if
that is what the community would like to do. We'll provide resources and
help in winding anything down if needed.

Best,
-jay


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 8, 2017 by Jay_Pipes (59,760 points)   3 10 14
0 votes

The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Jay Pipes jaypipes@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/06/2017 06:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer). Thanks
!

Mirantis' position is that the App Catalog was a good idea, but we agree
with you that other application repositories like DockerHub and Quay.io are
both more useful and more actively used.

The OpenStack App Catalog does indeed seem to unnecessarily compete with
those application repositories, and we would support its retirement if that
is what the community would like to do. We'll provide resources and help in
winding anything down if needed.

Best,
-jay


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@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-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 8, 2017 by dms_at_redhat.com (3,780 points)   3 4
0 votes

For the OpenStack Applications Catalog to be successful in its mission, it required other parts of OpenStack to consider the use case a priority. Over the years it became quite clear to me that a significant part of the OpenStack community does not want OpenStack to become a place where cloud native applications would be built/packaged/provided to users using OpenStacks apis but instead just a place to run virtual machines on which you might deploy a cloud native platform to handle that use case. As time goes on, and COE's gain multitenancy, I see a big contraction in the number of OpenStack deployments or deployed node count and a shifting of OpenStack based workloads more towards managing pet vm's, as the cloud native stuff moves more and more towards containers/COE's which don't actually need vm's.

This I think will bring the issue to a head in the OpenStack community soon. What is OpenStack? Is it purely an IaaS implementation? Its pretty good at that now. But something that will be very niche soon I think. Is it an Cloud Operating system? The community seems to have made that a resounding no. Is it an OpenSource competitor to AWS? Today, its getting further and further behind in that. If nothing changes, that will be impossible.

My 2 cents? I think the world does need an OpenSource implementation of what AWS provides. That can't happen on the path we're all going down now. We're struggling with division of vision between the two ideologies and lack of decision around a COE, causing us to spend a huge amount of effort on things like Trove/Sahara/etc to reproduce functionality in AWS, but not being as agile as AWS so we can't ever make headway. If we want to be an OpenSource AWS competitor, that requires us to make some hard calls, pick a COE (Kubernetes has won that space I believe), start integrating it quickly, and retool advanced services like Trove/Sahara/etc to target the COE rather then VM's for deployment. This should greatly enhance our ability to produce functional solutions quickly.

But, its ultimately the Community who decide what OpenStack will become. If we're ok with the path its headed down, to basically just be an IaaS, that's fine with me. I'd just like it to be a conscious decision rather then one that just happens. If thats the way it goes, lets just decide on it now, and let the folks that are spinning their wheels move on to a system that will help them make headway in their goals. It will be better for everyone.

Thanks,
Kevin


From: David Moreau Simard [dms@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 8:23 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][appcat] The future of the App Catalog

The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Jay Pipes jaypipes@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/06/2017 06:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer). Thanks
!

Mirantis' position is that the App Catalog was a good idea, but we agree
with you that other application repositories like DockerHub and Quay.io are
both more useful and more actively used.

The OpenStack App Catalog does indeed seem to unnecessarily compete with
those application repositories, and we would support its retirement if that
is what the community would like to do. We'll provide resources and help in
winding anything down if needed.

Best,
-jay


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@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-request@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-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 8, 2017 by Fox,_Kevin_M (29,360 points)   1 3 4
0 votes

My 2c: agreed with everything Kevin said. IMO OpenStack is currently open
source IaaS implementation and there's nothing wrong with this. For cloud
native apps COE makes more sense and these platforms are maturing rapidly.
The way OpenStack should evolve is to make consumption and coexistence of
virtualized workloads with COE workloads straightforward.
In regards to Application Catalog if OpenStack infra is not appropriate
place for its hosting purposes maybe moving it to Github or similar hosting
service should be considered.

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Fox, Kevin M Kevin.Fox@pnnl.gov wrote:

For the OpenStack Applications Catalog to be successful in its mission, it
required other parts of OpenStack to consider the use case a priority. Over
the years it became quite clear to me that a significant part of the
OpenStack community does not want OpenStack to become a place where cloud
native applications would be built/packaged/provided to users using
OpenStacks apis but instead just a place to run virtual machines on which
you might deploy a cloud native platform to handle that use case. As time
goes on, and COE's gain multitenancy, I see a big contraction in the number
of OpenStack deployments or deployed node count and a shifting of OpenStack
based workloads more towards managing pet vm's, as the cloud native stuff
moves more and more towards containers/COE's which don't actually need vm's.

This I think will bring the issue to a head in the OpenStack community
soon. What is OpenStack? Is it purely an IaaS implementation? Its pretty
good at that now. But something that will be very niche soon I think. Is it
an Cloud Operating system? The community seems to have made that a
resounding no. Is it an OpenSource competitor to AWS? Today, its getting
further and further behind in that. If nothing changes, that will be
impossible.

My 2 cents? I think the world does need an OpenSource implementation of
what AWS provides. That can't happen on the path we're all going down now.
We're struggling with division of vision between the two ideologies and
lack of decision around a COE, causing us to spend a huge amount of effort
on things like Trove/Sahara/etc to reproduce functionality in AWS, but not
being as agile as AWS so we can't ever make headway. If we want to be an
OpenSource AWS competitor, that requires us to make some hard calls, pick a
COE (Kubernetes has won that space I believe), start integrating it
quickly, and retool advanced services like Trove/Sahara/etc to target the
COE rather then VM's for deployment. This should greatly enhance our
ability to produce functional solutions quickly.

But, its ultimately the Community who decide what OpenStack will become.
If we're ok with the path its headed down, to basically just be an IaaS,
that's fine with me. I'd just like it to be a conscious decision rather
then one that just happens. If thats the way it goes, lets just decide on
it now, and let the folks that are spinning their wheels move on to a
system that will help them make headway in their goals. It will be better
for everyone.

Thanks,
Kevin


From: David Moreau Simard [dms@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 8:23 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][appcat] The future of the App Catalog

The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Jay Pipes jaypipes@gmail.com wrote:

On 03/06/2017 06:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer).
Thanks
!

Mirantis' position is that the App Catalog was a good idea, but we agree
with you that other application repositories like DockerHub and Quay.io
are
both more useful and more actively used.

The OpenStack App Catalog does indeed seem to unnecessarily compete with
those application repositories, and we would support its retirement if
that
is what the community would like to do. We'll provide resources and help
in
winding anything down if needed.

Best,
-jay



OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@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-request@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-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Adam Heczko
Security Engineer @ Mirantis Inc.


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 9, 2017 by Adam_Heczko (1,860 points)   1
0 votes

On 2017-03-09 10:04:43 +0100 (+0100), Adam Heczko wrote:
[...]
In regards to Application Catalog if OpenStack infra is not appropriate
place for its hosting purposes maybe moving it to Github or similar hosting
service should be considered.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the infra team continuing
to host the site/service if the community continues to consider it a
good idea. The concerns raised are mostly that it can look like an
NIH competition against much more successful cloud application
indexing services, causing those broader communities to continue to
regard us as adversarial reinventors of their particular wheels and
so hampering inter-community relationship building.
--
Jeremy Stanley


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 9, 2017 by Jeremy_Stanley (56,700 points)   3 5 7
0 votes

On 08/03/17 11:23, David Moreau Simard wrote:
The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

Look, it's true that legacy apps from the 90s will run on any VM you can
give them. But the rest of the world has spent the last 15 years moving
on from that. Applications of the future, and increasingly the present,
span multiple VMs/containers, make use of services provided by the
cloud, and interact with their own infrastructure. And users absolutely
will need ways of packaging and deploying them that work with the
underlying infrastructure. Even those apps from the 90s should be taking
advantage of things like e.g. Neutron security groups, configuration of
which is and will always be out of scope for Docker Hub images.

So no, we should NOT spend more effort on advertising that we aim to
become to cloud what Subversion is to version control. We've done far
too much of that already IMHO.

regards,
Zane.

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Jay Pipes jaypipes@gmail.com wrote:

On 03/06/2017 06:26 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Hello everyone,

The App Catalog was created early 2015 as a marketplace of pre-packaged
applications that you can deploy using Murano. Initially a demo by
Mirantis, it was converted into an open upstream project team, and
deployed as a "beta" as apps.openstack.org.

Since then it grew additional categories (Glance images, Heat & Tosca
templates), but otherwise did not pick up a lot of steam. The website
(still labeled "beta") features 45 glance images, 6 Tosca templates, 13
heat templates and 94 murano packages (~30% of which are just thin
wrappers around Docker containers). Traffic stats show around 100 visits
per week, 75% of which only read the index page.

In parallel, Docker developed a pretty successful containerized
application marketplace (the Docker Hub), with hundreds of thousands of
regularly-updated apps. Keeping the App Catalog around (including its
thinly-wrapped Docker container Murano packages) make us look like we
are unsuccessfully trying to compete with that ecosystem, while
OpenStack is in fact completely complementary.

In the past we have retired projects that were dead upstream. The App
Catalog is not in this case: it has an active maintenance team, which
has been successfully maintaining the framework and accepting
applications. If we end up retiring the App Catalog, it would clearly
not be a reflection on that team performance, which has been stellar
despite limited resources. It would be because the beta was arguably not
successful in building an active marketplace of applications, and
because its continuous existence is not a great fit from a strategy
perspective. Such removal would be a first for our community, but I
think it's now time to consider it.

Before we discuss or decide anything at the TC level, I'd like to
collect everyone thoughts (and questions) on this. Please feel free to
reply to this thread (or reach out to me privately if you prefer). Thanks
!

Mirantis' position is that the App Catalog was a good idea, but we agree
with you that other application repositories like DockerHub and Quay.io are
both more useful and more actively used.

The OpenStack App Catalog does indeed seem to unnecessarily compete with
those application repositories, and we would support its retirement if that
is what the community would like to do. We'll provide resources and help in
winding anything down if needed.

Best,
-jay


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@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-request@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-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 9, 2017 by Zane_Bitter (21,640 points)   3 5 9
0 votes

On 10 Mar 2017, at 06:02, Zane Bitter zbitter@redhat.com wrote:

On 08/03/17 11:23, David Moreau Simard wrote:

The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

Look, it's true that legacy apps from the 90s will run on any VM you can give them. But the rest of the world has spent the last 15 years moving on from that. Applications of the future, and increasingly the present, span multiple VMs/containers, make use of services provided by the cloud, and interact with their own infrastructure. And users absolutely will need ways of packaging and deploying them that work with the underlying infrastructure. Even those apps from the 90s should be taking advantage of things like e.g. Neutron security groups, configuration of which is and will always be out of scope for Docker Hub images.

So no, we should NOT spend more effort on advertising that we aim to become to cloud what Subversion is to version control. We've done far too much of that already IMHO.

100% agree with that.

And this whole discussion is taking me to the question: is there really any officially accepted strategy for OpenStack for 1, 3, 5 years? Is there any ultimate community goal we’re moving to regardless of underlying technologies (containers, virtualization etc.)? I know we’re now considering various community goals like transition to Python 3.5 etc. but these goals don’t tell anything about our future as an IT ecosystem from user perspective. I may assume that I’m just not aware of it. I’d be glad if it was true. I’m eager to know the answers for these questions. Overall, to me it feels like every company in the community just tries to pursue its own short-term (in the best case mid-term) goals without really caring about long-term common goals. So if we say OpenStack is a car then it seems like the wheels of this car are moving in different directions. Again, I’d be glad if it wasn’t true. So maybe some governance needed around setting and achieving ultimate goals of OpenStack? Or if they already exist we need to better explain them and advertise publicly? That in turn IMO could attract more businesses and contributors.

Renat Akhmerov
@Nokia


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 10, 2017 by renat.akhmerov_at_gm (5,640 points)   2 2 3
0 votes

Renat Akhmerov wrote:

On 10 Mar 2017, at 06:02, Zane Bitter <zbitter@redhat.com
zbitter@redhat.com> wrote:

On 08/03/17 11:23, David Moreau Simard wrote:

The App Catalog, to me, sounds sort of like a weird message that
OpenStack somehow requires applications to be
packaged/installed/deployed differently.
If anything, perhaps we should spend more effort on advertising that
OpenStack provides bare metal or virtual compute resources and that
apps will work just like any other places.

Look, it's true that legacy apps from the 90s will run on any VM you
can give them. But the rest of the world has spent the last 15 years
moving on from that. Applications of the future, and increasingly the
present, span multiple VMs/containers, make use of services provided
by the cloud, and interact with their own infrastructure. And users
absolutely will need ways of packaging and deploying them that work
with the underlying infrastructure. Even those apps from the 90s
should be taking advantage of things like e.g. Neutron security
groups, configuration of which is and will always be out of scope for
Docker Hub images.

So no, we should NOT spend more effort on advertising that we aim to
become to cloud what Subversion is to version control. We've done far
too much of that already IMHO.

100% agree with that.

And this whole discussion is taking me to the question: is there really
any officially accepted strategy for OpenStack for 1, 3, 5 years?

I can propose what I would like for a strategy (it's not more VMs and
more neutron security groups...), though if it involves (more) design by
committee, count me out.

I honestly believe we have to do the equivalent of a technology leapfrog
if we actually want to be relevant; but maybe I'm to eager...

Is
there any ultimate community goal we’re moving to regardless of
underlying technologies (containers, virtualization etc.)? I know we’re
now considering various community goals like transition to Python 3.5
etc. but these goals don’t tell anything about our future as an IT
ecosystem from user perspective. I may assume that I’m just not aware of
it. I’d be glad if it was true. I’m eager to know the answers for these
questions. Overall, to me it feels like every company in the community
just tries to pursue its own short-term (in the best case mid-term)
goals without really caring about long-term common goals. So if we say
OpenStack is a car then it seems like the wheels of this car are moving
in different directions. Again, I’d be glad if it wasn’t true. So maybe
some governance needed around setting and achieving ultimate goals of
OpenStack? Or if they already exist we need to better explain them and
advertise publicly? That in turn IMO could attract more businesses and
contributors.

Renat Akhmerov
@Nokia


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@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-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 10, 2017 by harlowja_at_fastmail (16,200 points)   2 5 8
0 votes

On 10/03/17 12:53 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote:

I can propose what I would like for a strategy (it's not more VMs and
more neutron security groups...), though if it involves (more) design by
committee, count me out.

I honestly believe we have to do the equivalent of a technology leapfrog
if we actually want to be relevant; but maybe I'm to eager...

seems like a manifesto waiting to be penned. probably best in a separate
thread... not sure with what tag if any. regardless, i think it'd be
good to see what others long term vision is... maybe it'll help others
consider what their own expectations are.

cheers,

--
gord


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Mar 10, 2017 by gordon_chung (19,300 points)   2 3 8
...