cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pranav Saxena <>
Subject RE: CloudStack Marketplace Update
Date Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:54:36 GMT
Kelcey , 

I guess you had couple of suggestions to be proposed  while we met at the Conference . Perhaps
you could bring them up here as well . 

Talking about the marketplace functionality  , we are using script tags ( require.js to be
specific ) to dynamically load content from remote files wherein we can pass the App ID /Name
provided by the customer and dynamically render it on the UI . I have kind of started with
this work  along with Brian and we'll eventually move the code to the community once the very
basic model  is running perfectly . Currently , we are more opened towards any suggestions/feedbacks
for the Marketplace backend design for further improvements.

Please refer to Jie's proposal link for further details .


-----Original Message-----
From: Kelcey Damage (BBITS) [] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 4:34 PM
Subject: RE: CloudStack Marketplace Update

I'll say this.. I wish the CloudStack UI looked like the marketplace proposal. Very slick!


-----Original Message-----
From: Jie Feng []
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: CloudStack Marketplace Update

Thanks Joe for the inputs! My comments inline. Chiradeep, thanks for the names!  You are sure
more creative than I am :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Brockmeier []
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: CloudStack Marketplace Update

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 03:24:18PM -0800, Jie Feng wrote:
> It seems the image got stripped out by the Apache mail server. So I 
> included text info instead. Sorry about the spam.

Probably just as well, some of us aren't using gui mail clients. ;-) 

> We had some early discussions in the mailing list regarding where to 
> host the Apache CloudStack listing repository and what to name this 
> feature. I included various options in the wiki (also see below), my 
> proposal for v1.0, and feedbacks I got from the Collaboration 
> Conference attendees. Comments, suggestions, flames?

The feature itself - having a way to list a "marketplace" of templates/images for CloudStack
users - sounds great. 

Companies like Citrix that ship a CloudStack can distribution like CloudPlatform populate
a marketplace with templates, etc. from their partners. Providers like Contegix could populate
the marketplace with their own offerings, etc. 

I'm not so sure about turning this feature on by default in ACS, though.
[Jie] I am thinking to turning this on by default in ACS so that it is visible immediately
to CloudStack admins after installation. This is really a way to make sure admins actually
know about the new feature. There will be a global configuration that admin can turn this
feature off entirely.

> =========================================
> Here are the Design Choices:
> Where to host Apache Listing Repository?
> There have been some discussions on the cloudstack-dev mailing list on 
> where to host the Apache Listing Repository a few months ago. Given 
> that additional resources will be required to create a separate 
> governance body for a community managed listing repository, hosting 
> the Apache Listing Repository within CloudStack source code tree for
> v1.0 seems to be a more viable option. The following is an analysis of 
> pros and cons for each option. This was presented at the CloudStack 
> Collaboration Conference and feedback was that as long as the actual 
> vendor software is not open source, and vendor can continue to update 
> the image template off release cycle, option 1 (CloudStack source code
tree) is fine.

Separate governance body? I'm guessing what you mean here is a subset of volunteers from the
committers/PPMC, etc.? 
[Jie] Yes.

>  *         Option 1. CloudStack Source Code Tree (part of CloudStack
>  distribution)  -- proposed for v1.0
>  o   Pros: Governed by the same Apache project process; listings are
>  tested and verified to work with each CloudStack version (just like 
> vendor plugins)

I think we have our hands full testing Apache CloudStack. Trying to test third party templates
that would run on CloudStack seems like a *lot* of work. 
[Jie] I think we only need to test the listing, but not the actual templates. Otherwise, I
agree it will be too much work. How do we test vendor plugins today? 

>  o   Cons: Vendors need to sign Apache contributor license agreement
>  (CLA); vendors cannot make changes to listing files off CloudStack 
> release cycle; new vendors and products have to wait for the next 
> CloudStack release cycle to be added

I'm not sure about whether vendors would need to sign the CLA, but I'm not entirely clear
on *what* it is that we'd be providing, exactly.
[Jie] Can you clarify more for the CLA?  I thought that anyone contributing anything to CloudStack
source code tree needs to sign CLA?  Is that true?
If we package the listing repository in the source code tree and ship with CloudStack distribution,
I assume vendors who puts the listings there needs to sign the CLA.

If I understand correctly, we'd be providing a pointer of some kind to images, etc. hosted
elsewhere? Obviously, we would not be able to host the images themselves given licensing/space
[Jie] Yes, for templates/ISOs, vendor will provide a pointer to image hosted elsewhere. We
will not host it in Apache.

>  *         Option 2. A separate listing repository hosted by the Apache
>  CloudStack community

Hosted where? How? What format is the listing going to be in? What kind of technical requirements
are we talking about? 
[Jie] That's my question also. Where can we host it if not in the source code tree? Apache
CloudStack website? See wiki for format:

>  o   Pros: Vendors do not need to sign Apache CLA; vendors can add/update
>  listing any time with changes propagated to each Cloudstack instance 
> with Marketplace enabled
>  o   Cons: What about governance? If no governance, the listing might
>  not work or can even contain virus. To provide governance requires us 
> to create a whole new process and need people

This would also be true of Option 1, yes? 
[Jie] For option 1, we will test the listing itself as part of the Apache CloudStack governance
process we use for the source code, so that we don't need to create a separate governance
process. We can only go as far as testing the listing does not include virus. We cannot test
the templates/ISOs (too time consuming). Should this be similar to vendor plugins?  In the
case of vendor plugins, we can only test the plugins.
Vendors' products can evolve outside of CloudStack and if they put some virus in, there is
no way we can govern that.

>  *         No Apache listing repository

This has my vote so far. 

If I understand the feature correctly, I would say the marketplace should be an optional feature
that can be turned on at compile time
- perhaps with a configuration that lets you point to one (or more) managed marketplaces provided
by third parties. That way if a company or group wants to manage a marketplace, they can publish
the URL it can be found at and users can flip the switch to get that. 
[Jie] You are correct that there is configuration item that lets you point to one (or more)
marketplace repositories. My proposal is to turn the feature on by default as explained above.

> What should be the name of this new component?

Marketplace seems fine to me, seems descriptive enough and doesn't overlap with other names
Joe Brockmeier
Twitter: @jzb

View raw message