Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <7A92FF96DF135843B4B608FB576BFC3E012DA27F42D3@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
References: 
 <7A92FF96DF135843B4B608FB576BFC3E012DA27F42D3@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:47:34 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CA+96GG4BaM56HmGpX9tg5AnvWrMQHH_DOWh508D9av0fOc7Rcw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] CloudStack Marketplace Update
From: Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
 <cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Jie Feng <Jie.Feng@citrix.com> wrote:
> Any inputs from others in the community?  I like to reach some consensus =
on where to host the Apache listing repository in the next couple of weeks =
(since if we go with option 1, we need to give vendors enough time to put l=
istings in source code prior to code freeze end of Jan).
>
> Jie

Jie,

Let me start by saying that I didn't (personally) pay enough attention
to the original proposal discussion as I should have.  Sorry for that,
but I'm paying allot of attention now.

I actually need us to back up the discussion quite a bit here, and ask
some potentially obvious questions that are more intention and process
centric than specifically addressing the proposal contents.  Once we
get through these, I probably have many more followup questions about
the feature proposal itself and the technical design.  (BTW - I wasn't
able to attend your talk at Collab, so I'm reacting to only the
information that has been shared / discussed on this list)

Here it goes:

It appears that your intention is for the marketplace code to be part
of CloudStack, correct?  IMO this isn't a match for CloudStack itself,
as much as it's a different project that might be linked to by a
CloudStack deployment.  Does this actually belong as a different
project?

However, I'll assume that the answer is yes (to being part of CS) and
that it's agreed that this code belongs in the CloudStack project, and
ask some follow up questions:

You mention wanting to give vendors enough time to put listings in the
source code prior to code freeze in Jan.  Are you talking about our
CloudStack 4.1.0 feature freeze?

Is this actually under development right now?  If so, where is the
code?  Who's working on it?  How can others in the community
participate?  Where is the technical design discussion happening?  Do
we have Jira records for tracking the dev work?  Where is the
discussion about QA'ing the software happening?

Last two questions (which do tie into the proposal a little bit, but
are also high level enough to have a significant):

You seem to be proposing that the Apache CloudStack community spend
time QA'ing external vendor virtual appliances.  Am I understanding
that right?  I'm very much against this being an Apache project
activity.

There is mention of static configuration files being used to store the
product listings, and storing them as part of the CloudStack source
code repository.  This doesn't make any sense to me on a number of
fronts.  Why would a product catalog be embedded in the source code of
the store front?  Wouldn't a better design be to allow *whomever* is
hosting this software to use runtime config changes to create and
manage their product listings?

I actually think that Maven is a reasonable analogy to the
marketplace, in that maven central is a site that complements the
Apache Maven project's code.  Is this analogy something you think
holds?  If so, notice that maven central isn't hosted by ASF.  The
Apache Maven community focuses on maven itself, and the hosting of
repos is delegated to whomever wants to host it.

Thoughts?

-chip

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jie Feng
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 4:14 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> 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 [mailto:jzb@zonker.net]
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:51 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> 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/im=
ages for CloudStack users - sounds great.
>
> Companies like Citrix that ship a CloudStack distribution like CloudPlatf=
orm can populate a marketplace with templates, etc. from their partners. Pr=
oviders like Contegix could populate the marketplace with their own offerin=
gs, 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 vi=
sible 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.
>
>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> 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 t=
ree) 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 wo=
rk.
> [Jie] I think we only need to test the listing, but not the actual templa=
tes. Otherwise, I agree it will be too much work. How do we test vendor plu=
gins 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 no=
t entirely clear on *what* it is that we'd be providing, exactly.
> [Jie] Can you clarify more for the CLA?  I thought that anyone contributi=
ng 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 wi=
th CloudStack distribution, I assume vendors who puts the listings there ne=
eds to sign the CLA.
>
> If I understand correctly, we'd be providing a pointer of some kind to im=
ages, etc. hosted elsewhere? Obviously, we would not be able to host the im=
ages themselves given licensing/space issues.
> [Jie] Yes, for templates/ISOs, vendor will provide a pointer to image hos=
ted 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 o=
f 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: https://cwiki.ap=
ache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Marketplace+Proposal
>
>>  o   Pros: Vendors do not need to sign Apache CLA; vendors can add/updat=
e
>>  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 tes=
ting the listing does not include virus. We cannot test the templates/ISOs =
(too time consuming). Should this be similar to vendor plugins?  In the cas=
e of vendor plugins, we can only test the plugins. Vendors' products can ev=
olve outside of CloudStack and if they put some virus in, there is no way w=
e 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) manag=
ed marketplaces provided by third parties. That way if a company or group w=
ants to manage a marketplace, they can publish the URL it can be found at a=
nd users can flip the switch to get that.
> [Jie] You are correct that there is configuration item that lets you poin=
t to one (or more) marketplace repositories. My proposal is to turn the fea=
ture 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 overla=
p with other names currently.
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> http://dissociatedpress.net/
> Twitter: @jzb
>