[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [rdo-list] Packstack refactor and future ideas



On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Alan Pevec <apevec redhat com> wrote:
>> I understand this, my concern is that if we remove this feature we will leave
>> users with no tool for doing multinode in a lightweight way and this might
>> drive off users from testing/adopting RDO.
>
> We would provide equivalent tool based on singlenode Packstack, with a
> clear unsupported message.
> That's really the only honest and responsible thing we can do, given
> resources available.
>

Given that:

- Users require multihost for PoCs
- We can't test multihost in CI

What is the difference between creating a new "unsupported" additional
tool and marking multihost capabilities in packstack as
"unsuported/untested"?.

Current code enabling multihost in packstack is working and i have
doubts about the expected wins in time supporting multihost in
packstack versus creating a new ansible tooling and modifying
packstack to work fine in this new "externally orchestrated mode".


>> I'm willing to create CI tests for multinode Packstack in order to maintain
>> this features.
>
> It's not just tests, it's multinode CI infra that is hard.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>
> _______________________________________________
> rdo-list mailing list
> rdo-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rdo-list
>
> To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe redhat com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]