Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications (TOSCA) and Juju

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Johannes Wettinger
<mail at jowettinger.de> wrote:
> Currently, I'm doing my Master's thesis. The topic of my thesis is
> about integrating DevOps methodologies into model-driven Cloud
> management. TOSCA defines itself as being a means to enable
> model-driven management of Cloud application whereas Juju is more

Not only Juju is a great tool for model-driven management of cloud
applications, but it actually works. :-)

> focused on the concerns of the DevOps movement. So, TOSCA and Juju

More generically, it's focused on the concerns of people: ops, devs, devops.

> What do you think is the reason for the complexity of TOSCA's meta
> model?
(...)
> I think most of TOSCA's complexity is there because of its goal to be
> general and highly portable.

There are many ways to be generic, and many ways to be portable.
Loading the user with complexity is not the right way to do it.

>>> What is your opinion of bringing these two worlds (TOSCA and Juju)
>>> together? I mean wouldn't it make a lot of sense to support TOSCA
>>> service templates in Juju? As an example, node types in TOSCA are
(...)
>> I'd love to see people collaborating, but considering that there's a
>> committee writing down a 40+ page specification that arbitrates how a
>> system that looks a lot like juju might work in theory, I don't see a
>> good path to do that. We can't simply stop producing working software
>> to make it speak a language that nothing else does.
>
> I completely agree! The goal cannot be to stop the development of
> Juju. ;-) But wouldn't it make sense for Juju to be able to import
> TOSCA node types as charms?

You've repeated the exact same question that I've answered above.


gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net