[Container-tools] [Devtools] Future Nulecule spec! Need collaborators / spec writers to help on this :)

[Charlie Drage]

Hi all!

I've updated the PR to include a *revision two* from all the comments
I've gotten already. Thank you for voicing your opinion on it!

This includes a significant change of removing the `/artifacts` folder
in favour of having a single Nulecule file for all our provisioning
needs.

This would make Nulecule *very* portable in the sense that if
provider information as well as the artifacts are embedded in a
singular Nulecule file, then the developer / user would only need to
transfer that file rather than a folder or tarball of a multitude of
information (usually very very small yaml/json files).

https://github.com/projectatomic/nulecule/pull/205

If you check our the PR you'll see what I mean! A complicated example
such as Etherpad pad is not only simpler to understand with the
artifacts in the Nulecule file, but also allows you to setup and use
global and variable params without the need of bouncing back-and-forth
between two files to understand what it does.

This means that a developer/user would only need to use the Nulecule
file for deployment, pop that in your favourite implementation
(atomicapp at github.com/projectatomic/atomicapp, atomicapp-go at
github.com/cdrage/atomicapp-go) and away you go.

Many thanks,

On 04/13, Suraj Deshmukh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Charlie Drage <cdrage at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I would like us to collaborate and come up with a new spec version
> > which is cleaner and easier to interpret.
> >
> > Decreasing the high-learning curve of our current spec and making
> > collaboration and creation of a Nuleculized application *a lot* more straight-forward.
> >
> > I've come up with a raw example of what it would ideally look like.
> >
> > Below is a link to a pull-request that contains an example of an
> > application using a new specification of Nulecule.
> >
> > https://github.com/projectatomic/nulecule/pull/205
> >
> > I've created it as a pull-request so people can easily comment on
> > each-line of the specification as well as have a high-level discussion
> > on the PR itself publically on GitHub.
> >
> > Not only that, but I've also included the concept of "manual" and
> > "automatic" building of orchestrated containers via the Nulecule spec.
> > Which some of you might find interesting.
> >
> > This is open to not only core-contributors but community contributors as
> > well. If you've always wanted to have a say on the Nulecule spec and
> > have an opinion on what it should look like, please feel free to
> > contribute!
> 
> Nice work Charlie to start this up, +1.
> 
> 
> >
> > --
> >
> > Charlie Drage
> > Red Hat - OSAS Team / Project Atomic
> > 4096R / 0x9B3B446C
> > http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x622CDF119B3B446C
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devtools mailing list
> > Devtools at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/devtools
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> - Suraj Deshmukh (surajd)
> 
> https://deshmukhsuraj.wordpress.com
> https://twitter.com/surajd_

-- 

Charlie Drage
Red Hat - OSAS Team / Project Atomic
4096R / 0x9B3B446C
http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x622CDF119B3B446C