From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fabio M. Di Nitto Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 16:45:54 +0100 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [ha-wg] [Pacemaker] [Linux-HA] [RFC] Organizing HA Summit 2015 In-Reply-To: <20141126154119.GN2522@suse.de> References: <540D853F.3090109@redhat.com> <20141124143957.GU2508@suse.de> <547346A9.6010901@redhat.com> <20141124151235.GX2508@suse.de> <54734BB5.3010104@redhat.com> <20141125095401.GG2522@suse.de> <1770308907.3548355.1416951961151.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20141126154119.GN2522@suse.de> Message-ID: <5475F5B2.3030807@fabbione.net> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/26/2014 4:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2014-11-25T16:46:01, David Vossel wrote: > > Okay, okay, apparently we have got enough topics to discuss. I'll > grumble a bit more about Brno, but let's get the organisation of that > thing on track ... Sigh. Always so much work! > > I'm assuming arrival on the 3rd and departure on the 6th would be the > plan? Yes that?s correct. Devconf starts the 6. Fabio > >>> Personally I'm interested in talking about scaling - with pacemaker-remoted >>> and/or a new messaging/membership layer. >> If we're going to talk about scaling, we should throw in our new docker support >> in the same discussion. Docker lends itself well to the "pet vs cattle" analogy. >> I see management of docker with pacemaker making quite a bit of sense now that we >> have the ability to scale into the "cattle" territory. > > While we're on that, I'd like to throw in a heretic thought and suggest > that one might want to look at etcd and fleetd. > >>> Other design-y topics: >>> - SBD > > Point taken. I have actually not forgotten this Andrew, and am reading > your development. I probably just need to pull the code over ... > >>> - degraded mode >>> - improved notifications >>> - containerisation of services (cgroups, docker, virt) >>> - resource-agents (upstream releases, handling of pull requests, testing) >> >> Yep, We definitely need to talk about the resource-agents. > > Agreed. > >>> User-facing topics could include recent features (ie. pacemaker-remoted, >>> crm_resource --restart) and common deployment scenarios (eg. NFS) that >>> people get wrong. >> Adding to the list, it would be a good idea to talk about Deployment >> integration testing, what's going on with the phd project and why it's >> important regardless if you're interested in what the project functionally >> does. > > OK. So QA is within scope as well. It seems the agenda will fill up > quite nicely. > > > Regards, > Lars >