* Re: kdevops-ng: graduating kdevops beyond Ansible
@ 2026-07-01 8:22 Daniel Gomez
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Daniel Gomez @ 2026-07-01 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Layton
Cc: Luis Chamberlain, Chuck Lever, kdevops, tools, GOST, Josef Bacik,
Amir Goldstein, Carlos Maiolino, Chandan Babu R, David Sterba,
Song Liu, Scott Mayhew, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki,
Konstantin Ryabitsev, linux-xfs, Darrick J. Wong, Carlos Maiolino,
Zorro Lang, fstests
On 2026-06-18T08:31:51-04:00, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2026-06-18 at 11:30 +0200, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> > kdevops is a framework for Linux kernel development and test automation.
> > Its core features, namely workflow reproducibility, variability, and
> > scalability, are delivered through Kconfig, the variability language,
> > and Ansible, which provides host and guest idempotency along with
> > workflow orchestration at scale, whether on baremetal, local VMs, or
> > the cloud.
> >
> > kdevops supports rolling distributions such as Debian testing, Fedora,
> > and openSUSE. Recently we extended Nix support, which raised the
> > question: how do we drive Nix's declarative language from Ansible? We
> > answered by wiring Nix in under Ansible and its templates, as one more
> > way to declare host and guest environments. But that was the wrong
> > framing: we had bolted Nix onto today's toolkit instead of rethinking
> > it. Reproducibility and idempotency now come from Nix by construction,
> > so I think Ansible's original reason for being in kdevops falls away.
> > The better question is: how do we keep kdevops's core principles, lean
> > on Nix, and drop Ansible?
> >
> > What remains once you do is not the configuration management plane. It
> > is development workflow orchestration: build QEMU, build the kernel,
> > build a guest rootfs/closure, boot it, run a test, collect results,
> > diff against a baseline. That work is imperative and sequenced, work
> > for a workflow engine, which is where tools like Windmill [1] come in.
> > Windmill calls itself as "the fastest workflow engine" and an
> > "open-source developer platform to power your entire infra and turn
> > scripts into webhooks, workflows and UIs." Choosing to move kdevops
> > onto Windmill would keep what made kdevops kdevops, namely workflows,
> > quick bring-ups, baselines, and A/B regression detection, while trading
> > Kconfig, Make, Ansible, and host-distro provisioning for typed
> > run-forms, flows as code, and a worker queue. Nix supplies the
> > environment, much like a container or venv/poetry, along with the guest
> > OS system closure: declarative and portable. Windmill orchestrates the
> > whole pipeline end to end, graduating kdevops into a fully reproducible,
> > scalable, and configurable kernel-development framework, with both a UI
> > and a CLI, that runs locally or in the cloud. Defined as code and driven
> > by schedules and triggers, the same flows also make it a continuous
> > integration pipeline. Because steps can be written in any language
> > Windmill supports, including Ansible, Bash, Go, Python, and Rust,
> > developers can not only use kdevops but extend it with their own
> > scripts, turning it into a workflow hub. Note that choosing this path
> > does not mean NixOS is required on the controller node; Nix is simply a
> > runtime dependency that can be installed alongside your distro of
> > choice.
> >
> > It'd be good to know what folks think about the possibility of evolving
> > kdevops in this direction, deprecating Ansible along with Kconfig and
> > Makefiles in favor of the new approach. To that end, I suggest a demo
> > day where I can show why I think this is the next step worth taking, and
> > whether it's a tradeoff users and maintainers are willing to make.
> >
> > If this is of interest and you'd like a look, I've ported equivalents of
> > bootlinux (direct boot), qemu-build, and the systemd/QEMU bringup (QSU),
> > plus an fstests run for XFS in the proof-of-concept demo project [2].
> > You can also find some screenshots in [3].
> >
> > A note on licensing. Windmill's engine is AGPLv3; its OpenFlow flow
> > format and client libraries are Apache-2.0. kdevops-ng runs Windmill
> > unmodified and self-hosted as a separate service, and the flows and
> > scripts are kdevops-ng's own copyleft-next-0.3.1 code, executed by
> > Windmill rather than derived from it, so there shouldn't be any
> > licensing concerns.
> >
> > [1] https://windmill.dev
> > [2] https://github.com/dagomez137/kdevops-ng
> > [3] https://github.com/dagomez137/kdevops-ng/tree/main/screenshots
>
> Some thoughts:
>
> I'd be interested to see the demo. It's a little hard to make a
> judgment about moving it in this direction without knowing specifically
> what it would look like. I took a quick look at the git repo and the
> windmill site, but I don't really "get it" yet.
+cc xfs folks.
I have published a documentation website here:
https://kdevops-ng.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
It covers the project's concepts, terminology, deployment, roadmap and more.
I've also included a demo video to showcasing how to build the kernel
and run the fstest suite for XFS and review the results (all in Windmill UI):
https://kdevops-ng.readthedocs.io/en/latest/getting-started/demos.html
I'd also like to suggest holding an office hours session toward the end of
this month (in about four weeks), so we can discuss about this, questions, etc.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2026-07-01 8:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-01 8:22 kdevops-ng: graduating kdevops beyond Ansible Daniel Gomez
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox