[aerogear-dev] [feedhenry-dev] Proposal for addition of --mobile flag to oc cluster up

Wojciech Trocki wtrocki at redhat.com
Fri Jan 12 09:27:09 EST 2018 

Reason why I proposed that is having mobile flag is harder to accept and it
will impose limitations from the beginning on our system as some details
will be hardcoded into openshift client.
I also see problems with maintaining this flag, handling multiple versions
of clients etc.
Mobile flag has also a lots of functionalities behind so it will take a
while to explain and understand all requirements/impacts.

While entire idea is brilliant I wanted to propose additional aproach
(without rejecting original idea or proposal which is fine to have).

IMHO Starting by small steps will help us with acceptance - not all changes
will be accepted, but some of them will be.
Having more than 4-5 contributors will help us a lot. We can establish
community working group and propose things we care about.
Have some part in openshift ecosystem. To do that we will be able to get
more contributors and eventually it may lead us to something like mobile
flag.
This is what RedHat does a lot - see node.js, docker, kubernetes example.

IMHO Best for changes to be done in some small steps and by different
people to get more contributors and recognition in community.
We already have strong presence in ASB thanks to Craig.

This why in my own opinion* oc cluster up --metrics* is not the same as *oc
cluster up --mobile*
Metrics team is backed and supported by working group. It's also part of
their documentation.

> ​@Wojciech please correct me, if I’ve still misunderstood anything!​

That sounds great!
Plus change mentioned before

> Add parameters to oc cluster up, to be able to configure the
ansible-service-broker with custom docker credentials and docker org to
pull in the ASBs from.

There also many initiatives around `oc cluster up` based on ideas that were
not be acceptable upstream.
Good example: https://github.com/openshift-evangelists/oc-cluster-wrapper

See oc-cluster-wrapper plugins:
https://github.com/openshift-evangelists/oc-cluster-wrapper/tree/master/plugins.d


On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Peter Braun <pbraun at redhat.com> wrote:

> If we stick with the —mobile flag proposal setting up the service broker
> and default org is not enough. Don’t we need to install our custom resource
> definitions too?
>
>
> Am 12.01.2018 um 13:21 schrieb Matthias Wessendorf <mwessend at redhat.com>:
>
> I was about to say, that I'd be not surprised if there is not that much
> interest in brining this in...
>
> Currently they have "oc cluster ACTION [options]",
>
> and for the "up" action, they list a bunch of options, including
> installing (experimental) bits, like: Cassandra/Hawkular), via the
> --metrics option
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Craig Brookes <cbrookes at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> While that is an interesting proposal around the addons, I would suggest
>> waiting for the OpenShift team to get back on your issue. Adding a plugin
>> structure to oc is likely a much bigger piece of work and need a lot more
>> engagement from the OpenShift team.
>> That doesn't mean a different proposal for this approach could not be
>> made however, but rather that our current proposal covers our immediate
>> need and has clear prior art.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>> mwessend at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd actually prefer more --mobile - which than does exactly what we need
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:04 PM, Phil Brookes <pbrookes at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’ve discussed this privately with Wojciech as I had misunderstood his
>>>> suggestion, so here’s my attempt to clarify the discussion:
>>>>
>>>> Rather than inserting our mobile oriented tasks into the upstream tool
>>>> (oc), which doesn’t provide value to all users of that tool but rather only
>>>> to the users who are interested in the mobile use-case; we should instead
>>>> modify the tool so that it can accept addons, similar (ideally, identical)
>>>> to minishift addons.
>>>>
>>>> The proposal here would be something like:
>>>>
>>>> oc cluster addons install mobilecore
>>>> oc cluster addons enable mobilecore
>>>> oc cluster up
>>>>
>>>> There a few benefits to this solution:
>>>>
>>>>    - There is a clear value-add to the upstream tool
>>>>    - We only need to maintain one mobilecore plugin for both minishift
>>>>    and oc cluster up
>>>>    - The barrier to entry for mobile developers is low
>>>>    - The process for setting up a local cluster is the same with both
>>>>    tools
>>>>    - Future changes to the setup process of the Mobile-Core can be
>>>>    submitted to our own repo
>>>>
>>>> ​@Wojciech please correct me, if I’ve still misunderstood anything!​
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Phil.
>>>> ​
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Craig Brookes <cbrookes at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:46 AM, David Martin <davmarti at redhat.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there's great value in --mobile flag.
>>>>>> Its the same approach for metrics and logging (--metrics, --logging)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would do everything needed to enable the mobile extension and get
>>>>>> the cluster into the state we want.
>>>>>> Having to provide multiple flags would make it just that little more
>>>>>> complex that it raises the barrier.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do think there's upstream value in allowing configuring a default
>>>>>> org for the broker though, but I don't think it should be part of this
>>>>>> proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12 January 2018 at 11:39, Phil Brookes <pbrookes at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey Wojciech,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks a lot for the feedback.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I have understood you correctly, you are suggesting splitting
>>>>>>> this task in to two discrete pieces of work:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    - Add parameters to oc cluster up, to be able to configure the
>>>>>>>    ansible-service-broker with custom docker credentials and docker org to
>>>>>>>    pull in the ASBs from.
>>>>>>>    - Add the —mobile flag to enable the Mobile-Core UI extension.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With the intention of making this an easier change to adopt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If that is correct then I am happy to proceed this way and I can
>>>>>>> update the proposal to reflect this as a route to implementation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe it would be best to bring this discussion to the proposal so
>>>>>>> that the OpenShift team also have access to it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Phil.
>>>>>>> ​
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Wojciech Trocki <
>>>>>>> wtrocki at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mobile flag as it doesn't provide ability to change values and
>>>>>>>> imposes some hard dependencies.
>>>>>>>> That may be hard accept and maintain on upstream.
>>>>>>>> Upstream works by generalization so if we want to contribute there
>>>>>>>> it's best to pass something that can be used by many people.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about `oc cluster up --service-broker=true
>>>>>>>> --service-broker-org=aerogearcatalog` and whatever else we need?
>>>>>>>> That's easier to accept and contribute upstream.
>>>>>>>> I have done changes for cluster up recently so if you need anything
>>>>>>>> in that let me know - we can work on this together.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another idea is to specify oc cluster up pre/post actions (hooks)
>>>>>>>> that will allow people to run ansible roles for things we need.
>>>>>>>> That will be solid proposal that upstream may consider.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Developers can still have simple command by doing alias:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *alias oc-mobile-up=`oc cluster up --service-broker=true
>>>>>>>> --service-broker-org=aerogearcatalog` *
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:51 AM, David Ffrench <
>>>>>>>> dffrench at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fantastic Phil, This is 100% needed in my opinion. The mobile
>>>>>>>>> services need to be a first class citizen in OpenShift to ensure easy setup
>>>>>>>>> and adoption.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DAVID FFRENCH
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> senior software engineer, RED HAT MOBILE
>>>>>>>>> Red Hat Waterford <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>> Communications House, Cork Road
>>>>>>>>> Waterford, Ireland
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> dffrench at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://red.ht/sig>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>>>>>> mwessend at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +9001
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Phil Brookes <
>>>>>>>>>> pbrookes at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have opened a proposal with the OpenShift team, hoping to
>>>>>>>>>>> start a discussion around the addition of a --mobile=true flag
>>>>>>>>>>> to the oc cluster up command. Running oc cluster up
>>>>>>>>>>> --mobile=true will start a local OpenShift cluster with all of
>>>>>>>>>>> the MCP features enabled.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This would be a great way for us to gain some exposure for the
>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile Core and get it into the hands of developers more quickly and
>>>>>>>>>>> easily, so I’d love to see you share your thoughts on this idea. You can
>>>>>>>>>>> review / comment / support it here:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openshift/origin/issues/18089
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Phil.
>>>>>>>>>>> ​
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Project lead AeroGear.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> WOJCIECH TROCKI
>>>>>>>> Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IM: wtrocki
>>>>>>>> <https://red.ht/sig>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> David Martin
>>>>>> Red Hat Mobile
>>>>>> Twitter: @irldavem
>>>>>> IRC: @irldavem (#aerogear)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Craig Brookes
>>>>> RHMAP
>>>>> @maleck13 Github
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Project lead AeroGear.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Craig Brookes
>> RHMAP
>> @maleck13 Github
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Project lead AeroGear.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> feedhenry-dev mailing list
> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>
>


-- 

WOJCIECH TROCKI

Red Hat Mobile <https://www.redhat.com/>

IM: wtrocki
<https://red.ht/sig>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20180112/364174b9/attachment-0001.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list